# China All Su-35 news



## Max The Boss

China to get Su-35 fighter jets 

The Su-35 is a super maneuverable fighter jet, copied from the Su-30 prototype. The Su-35 fighter jet is similar with the F-18 Super Hornet.

The Su-35 is still in development by the Russian company Sukhoi and is determined for the Russian Air Force. It's an air-defense and ground-attack jet, which should be operating under all weather conditions. However Russia still hasn't given an order. Sukhoi works with the money from what China has paid for the Su-35 fighter jet. 

Technical Material

In contrast with the Su-27 the Su-35 has protect material made from carbon-fiber with an alloy of aluminum and lithium. The nozzles in the 2 engines have been replaced by titanium. Maximum speed is around 2.4 mach without bombs or missiles.

Radar and electronics

The Su-35 has radar which can at the same time observe the air and ground threats. This radar, digital phased array radar can more like: do ground surveillance, searching and select enemies in the sky, and warning to avoid determined fields. The Su-35 has also a satellite control navigation system. With a fly-by-wire system it has a high level of maneuverability. With ECM (Electronic Counter Measures) pods mounted on the wings the Su-35 can do electronic warfare. 

Weapons

The Su-35 has 12 standards which can be expanded to 14 points to carry air-to-air and air-to-surface missiles. 


This Information (Rumor) spreading with some Asian Defense Analysts.

Looks like China will replace Su-27 with Su-35.

Any one knows more Information about China getting Su-35 fighter jet?


----------



## Gabbar

*LINK PLEASE!!!*


----------



## TaimiKhan

As far as rumors go, China did evaluate the Su-35, but the deal didn't go through due to many factors.


----------



## aimarhenry

if china still interested in buying better aircraft,we would've joint T-50 program a couple of years ago,i don't think china will go for SU-35 unless it's able to show us some stunning part like plasma stealth


----------



## aimarraul

*Russia ready to sell Su-35 fighter jets to China*

Russia's state-run arms exporter Rosoboronexport said on Tuesday it was ready to hold talks with China on the delivery of advanced Su-35 fighter aircraft to the Chinese air force.

"We are ready to work with our Chinese partners to this end [Su-35 deliveries]," Deputy General Director of Rosoboronexport Alexander Mikheyev said at the Airshow China 2010, which is being held on November 16-21 in Zhuhai.

The Su-35 Flanker-E, powered by two 117S engines with thrust vectoring, combines high maneuverability and the capability to effectively engage several air targets simultaneously using both guided and unguided missiles and weapon systems.

Russia's Sukhoi aircraft maker earlier said it planned to start deliveries of the new aircraft, billed as "4++ generation using fifth-generation technology," to foreign clients in 2011 and produce Su-35s over a period of 10 years up to 2020.

China International Aviation & Aerospace Exhibition (Airshow China) is the only international aerospace trade show in China that is endorsed by the Chinese central government. The biannual arms exhibition has been held in Zhuhai since 1996.

ZHUHAI (China), November 16 (RIA Novosti)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## pzkilo

what a joke


----------



## AMCA

pzkilo said:


> what a joke



Whats a *"JOKE"* In this??? , Is this the fist time u are buying a Russian stuff that you call it a joke?


----------



## yjs14

yeah, Russia wants to sell...

BUT NOW China wouldn't like to buy that valueless fighter.

That's the JOKE!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AMCA

yjs14 said:


> yeah, Russia wants to sell...
> 
> BUT NOW China wouldn't like to buy that valueless fighter.
> 
> That's the JOKE!



Wierd Jokes Probably, when You still use there engines to power your much esteemed fighters, Does that Not form an even bigger joke which could be lol'd upon a few more times??


----------



## blufmaster

yayayayaya..............its a good joke.............hahahhaha

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Indiarox

If China thinks the Su-35 is a joke(which i highly doubt),why are Indians complaining about it ??
An Ignorant opponent is a easier opponent to defeat.......


----------



## siegecrossbow

Interesting. Personally I think that China is more interested in tech transfer at this point. Su-35 is a pretty potent platform so if the Russians want to sell them I don't see the problem with buying expecially given the current political climate.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AMCA

Indiarox said:


> If China thinks the Su-35 is a joke(which i highly doubt),why are Indians complaining about it ??
> An Ignorant opponent is a easier opponent to defeat.......



If You say so brother

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Indiarox

siegecrossbow said:


> Interesting. Personally I think that China is more interested in tech transfer at this point. Su-35 is a pretty potent platform so if the Russians want to sell them I don't see the problem with buying expecially given the current political climate.



One question What Impact will this have on the Fighters in development??????


----------



## kingofkings

It's already known that after the big fuss Russia offered SU 35's to China.

But Is China considering this offer ?

This is 4++ gen and already China is working on 5th gen fighter, So I think it may decline the offer.


----------



## cloneman

Talk means nothing.Su35 is a good fighter,but the PLAAF wont buy it since itself has too many projects.


----------



## farhan_9909

Time is gone now china will only sell fighter..

Because china is competing With USA.Means No amrs import anymore


----------



## Dragon Emperor

Wrong timing for Russia. Why would China want to import a 4th gen fighter with absolutely no stealth when China herself is about to test a 5th gen stealth fighter soon. Russia is so Laughable.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## flameboard

Does anyone think Pakistan should buy a few? Plus why don't Russia and China team up to solve the smoke problem in Russian engines.


----------



## yjs14

AMCA said:


> Wierd Jokes Probably, when You still use there engines to power your much esteemed fighters, Does that Not form an even bigger joke which could be lol'd upon a few more times??



oh My God! You must be confused!

We are discussing the SU35 fighter instead of an engine.

In my opinion, SU35 was already useless for PLAF.

Er~I loved a girl 10 years ago,She didn't love me then.

Now she tell me she love me so so deep...But I've lost my passion forever.

Nice story Nice JOKE


----------



## monitor

This confusing while we are hearing that china is about to test its fifth generation fighter and having large amount of j-10 j-11 in advance capability then why would they need to buy su-35 ? this means may be china's 5th generation fighter in trouble or they are not totally happy with their indegineous fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## siegecrossbow

Indiarox said:


> One question What Impact will this have on the Fighters in development??????



At this stage in the game China's fighter jets' primary weakness is the lack of a capable engine. Although the latest news indicates that the WS-10 has successfully equipped the J-11B and J-11Bs the J-10s still need Russian AL-31s. 

As I said before purchasing the Su-35 may also strengthen ties between China and Russia. This could also be one of the considerations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Lol, J-14 is just right in the corner, i think that we don't even need PAK-FA if they wish to sell to us.


----------



## mnd

yjs14 said:


> oh My God! You must be confused!
> 
> We are discussing the SU35 fighter instead of an engine.
> 
> In my opinion, SU35 was already useless for PLAF.
> 
> Er~I loved a girl 10 years ago,She didn't love me then.
> 
> Now she tell me she love me so so deep...But I've lost my passion forever.
> 
> Nice story Nice JOKE


 This one is not that su-35. This is a further modernization wich uses 5th gen elements. Production in Russia only started this year and this is a brand new fighter. Also, the earlier su-35 was not sold because of the copying scandal, not for another issue.


----------



## mnd

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Lol, J-14 is just right in the corner, i think that we don't even need PAK-FA if they wish to sell to us.



Well, you bought our mig 1.44, and you pretty copied the su-27 and -33. In fact, you copied ALL from soviet-russia, from space industry, aeronautics, engineering, military organisation to cars, trucks, boots and uniforms. Sincerely, I respect chinese people but all of you fanboys just stop trolling here.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Lidsky said:


> Well, you bought our mig 1.44, and you pretty copied the su-27 and -33. In fact, you copied ALL from soviet-russia, from space industry, aeronautics, engineering, military organisation to cars, trucks, boots and uniforms. Sincerely, I respect chinese people but all of you fanboys just stop trolling here.



Dude, i didn't say J-14 is better, but if we keep spending money to buy PAK-FA, it would have killed off the fund of our own 5th gen fighter. 

If we cannot build anything remotely close to a 5th gen fighter, then we would have to please to Russia to sell 5th gen fighter to us. Yes, Russian military industries have helped us a lot in the past, we appreciate that. But now it is time for us to build something of our own. 

So no thanks, we don't need any Su-35 right now.


----------



## Typhoon

So now its clear that all the tall claims of China having great indigenousness A/C industry falls flat, its more like _*"what we produce is sold to others and pakistan, however, we ourselves buy Russian"*_.

Now I can very well imagine why PAF is running here and there in EU, for better avionic, ewr, radar et al for JF-17, because they know the capabilities of China. Now its clear why PAF is going for further F-16!!

I have heard China is buying New RD-93 Engines, here goes Chinese tall claims of indigenous engines and what will happen to those WS-10,9,8 etc we all know China would try and shove it down Pakistan and themselves buy Russian.........Nice way to fund R&D!!


----------



## CardSharp

Lidsky said:


> Well, you bought our mig 1.44, and you pretty copied the su-27 and -33. In fact, you copied ALL from soviet-russia, from space industry, aeronautics, engineering, military organisation to cars, trucks, boots and uniforms. Sincerely, I respect chinese people but all of you fanboys just stop trolling here.



Money for the PAK-FA goes to Russian R&D, Funds for Indigenous program expands Chinese R&D capacity. Enough said. 

I'm sure he didn't mean that the PAK-FA isn't technologically very advanced.


----------



## CardSharp

Typhoon said:


> So now its clear that all the tall claims of China having great indigenousness A/C industry falls flat, its more like _*"what we produce is sold to others and pakistan, however, we ourselves buy Russian"*_.
> 
> Now I can very well imagine why PAF is running here and there in EU, for better avionic, ewr, radar et al for JF-17, because they know the capabilities of China. Now its clear why PAF is going for further F-16!!
> 
> I have heard China is buying New RD-93 Engines, here goes Chinese tall claims of indigenous engines and what will happen to those WS-10,9,8 etc we all know China would try and shove it down Pakistan and themselves buy Russian.........Nice way to fund R&D!!



Crawl back to the hole you oozed out of, troll.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## GodlessBastard

CardSharp said:


> Crawl back to the hole you oozed out of, troll.



What he said is true...

Don't call others trolls just because you can't accept the reality


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Typhoon said:


> So now its clear that all the tall claims of China having great indigenousness A/C industry falls flat, its more like _*"what we produce is sold to others and pakistan, however, we ourselves buy Russian"*_.



Ur a funny man\women..... I believe the article says tht russia has offered to sell Su-35 to china? so read the topic before ranting......

About the tall claims isnt it evident tht chinese aircraft have been sold to many countries?





> Now I can very well imagine why PAF is running here and there in EU, for better avionic, ewr, radar et al for JF-17, because they know the capabilities of China. Now its clear why PAF is going for further F-16!!
> I have heard China is buying New RD-93 Engines, here goes Chinese tall claims of indigenous engines and what will happen to those WS-10,9,8 etc we all know China would try and shove it down Pakistan and themselves buy Russian.........Nice way to fund R&D



*
Now i can imagine why india is running around israel for avionics used in russian SU-30 and other jets instead of russia itself?*

Shoving russian stuff down india??

F-16 is a matured multi role fighter while JF-17 is a new kid (Light multi role) on the block which is maturing with time.....* also PAC is already testing 4 avionics for JF-17..... and NRIET AESA is already in development and WS series engine already sucessfully completed its testing.....*
They had bought a 100 RD-93 engines long ago..... And about shoving it down.... *i hope ur highness knows abt the abt the J-10B,J-11B and other jets with indigenous chinese engines.............*
Now go and sleep and no more Bhratshyt forums frm now on.


----------



## CardSharp

GodlessBastard said:


> What he said is true...
> 
> Don't call others trolls just because you can't accept the reality



You bore me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Vimana1

Thought China wanted the su-33 for its naval arm now they want su35 as well

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Typhoon

CardSharp said:


> Crawl back to the hole you oozed out of, troll.



Rather than arguing/debating intelligently you have proved where China stands!!

Here something for you too, you can interpret it as Chinese *products*, chinese *quality* etc etc:


----------



## GodlessBastard

CardSharp said:


> You bore me.



Well, there is a limit to what I can say, because the mods here are Nazis


----------



## Nomenclature

siegecrossbow said:


> As I said before purchasing the Su-35 may also strengthen ties between China and Russia. This could also be one of the considerations.



While that's certainly true, Russia is also marketing S-400 to China. If we want a large arms order to boost relations, I think buying S-400 will be a better choice than Su-35s.

Internal politics could potentially also play a role here though. Buying Su-35 will send the Shenyang aviation industry (SAC, Liming, etc) a very clear signal that the PLA is not happy with their recent slow development progress.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gypgypgyp

1 simple fact

The last fighter contract between China and Rassia is around year 2000 for Su-30 MKK, and received in 2003.

In lasr decade, China did not start any new negotiation for fighter but for engine or carrier. 


Plz remember that


----------



## ao333

Typhoon said:


> So now its clear that all the tall claims of China having great indigenousness A/C industry falls flat, its more like _*"what we produce is sold to others and pakistan, however, we ourselves buy Russian"*_.



Why would you even try to pose as a Brit? I thought Indians don't dig that. How do I know? Because Brits don't give a **** about the Chinese military, only Indians do.

Back to topic, 117S ain't a joke guys. It's the 2nd most advanced Russian engine and the most advanced engine available to China. Your military will most likely buy Su-35 for the engine, not the aircraft itself.

Furthermore, the diplomatic tide is pushing you guys away from the US and closer to Russia. There was a CNN survey in Russia showing that 70&#37; of Russians believed China was their most trustworthy ally after Belarus, with India in 5th place.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gypgypgyp

ao333 said:


> Why would you even try to pose as a Brit? I thought Indians don't dig that. How do I know? Because Brits don't give a **** about the Chinese military, only Indians do.
> 
> Back to topic, 117S ain't a joke guys. It's the 2nd most advanced Russian engine and the most advanced engine available to China. Your military will most likely buy Su-35 for the engine, not the aircraft itself.
> 
> Furthermore, the diplomatic tide is pushing you guys away from the US and closer to Russia. There was a CNN survey in Russia showing that 70% of Russians believed China was their most trustworthy ally after Belarus, with India in 5th place.




Bro, 117s is good stuff, we all know that. But Su-35 is not a engine. And CAC is more likely use &#1040;&#1051;-31&#1060;&#1052;2 for test X gen and wait for WS-15 mature. China already work on WS-15 for 25 years, no one can purchase large amount aircraft just for engine at this time.


----------



## gypgypgyp

ao333 said:


> Why would you even try to pose as a Brit? I thought Indians don't dig that. How do I know? Because Brits don't give a **** about the Chinese military, only Indians do.
> 
> Back to topic, 117S ain't a joke guys. It's the 2nd most advanced Russian engine and the most advanced engine available to China. Your military will most likely buy Su-35 for the engine, not the aircraft itself.
> 
> Furthermore, the diplomatic tide is pushing you guys away from the US and closer to Russia. There was a CNN survey in Russia showing that 70% of Russians believed China was their most trustworthy ally after Belarus, with India in 5th place.



I am sure China has no willingness to against or away from US at this stage. If you read the original statement from China government, you will know China currently acknowledge that US is most important country for world steable, China will help US at any stage as long as US policy do not against China directly.


----------



## S_O_C_O_M

Indiarox said:


> If China thinks the Su-35 is a joke(which i highly doubt),why are Indians complaining about it ??
> An Ignorant opponent is a easier opponent to defeat.......



That maybe so but a naive opponent is even easier to defeat.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dingyibvs

ao333 said:


> Why would you even try to pose as a Brit? I thought Indians don't dig that. How do I know? Because Brits don't give a **** about the Chinese military, only Indians do.
> 
> Back to topic, 117S ain't a joke guys. It's the 2nd most advanced Russian engine and the most advanced engine available to China. Your military will most likely buy Su-35 for the engine, not the aircraft itself.
> 
> Furthermore, the diplomatic tide is pushing you guys away from the US and closer to Russia. There was a CNN survey in Russia showing that 70% of Russians believed China was their most trustworthy ally after Belarus, with India in 5th place.



The engine is great, but overall, the Su-35 doesn't provide enough of an advantage over the J-11B to warrant an import. Also, it's likely that more advanced variants of the WS-10A would be cheaper(both research $$ and construction $$) and ready sooner than likewise for the a reverse engineered 117S.


----------



## Dragon Emperor

People China doesn't need Su-35 because the new JXX that China will soon be testing may even be superior that the PAK-FA.


----------



## yangtomous

buy su27 that China first time get a main trend 3th fighter,buy su30 that China get a powerful 3th MRCA.what su35 represent .it is a 3.5th fighter just a little better than su30 ,but can't improve to next generation.SU35 can't became a milestone for PLAAF.now we have long range J11 and middle range J10 .and we also developing our 4th fighter.something that you can't just buy from other.su35 is a better fighter but not necessary.so China wouldn't buy this fighter.
for the engine ws10 produce 100 per years now.and RD93 is buy for JF17.
ws15 in on the developing .we didin't stop there just moving on day after day.Russia is a power country ,you help us a lot ,appreciate it.but it doesn't means you can better than China forever. Clam down analyse the situation.Rome was not built in a day.China also.


----------



## siegecrossbow

No one is dissing Russian technology here (I hope). Russia is still well ahead of China in many areas. This, however, means that China needs to work harder to catch up in those areas before we can establish ourselves as the next aerospace giant. Instead of buying the Su-35s wholesale I'd rather prefer a joint-venture between China and Russia on a new jet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ptldM3

pzkilo said:


> what a joke





yjs14 said:


> yeah, Russia wants to sell...
> 
> BUT NOW China wouldn't like to buy that valueless fighter.
> 
> That's the JOKE!





blufmaster said:


> yayayayaya..............its a good joke.............hahahhaha



The joke is on you.

Clearly i'm picking up a sense of fanboyism and a total lack of knowledge.

The SU-35 is considered one of the top aircraft in the orld today, everything from a reduced rcs, to lower weight and a more capable avionics package has been offered. The SU-35 features a extremely high level of sensor integration, 'itellect' and an impresive avionics suit which includes the IBRIS, OLS-35 and 117S, just to name a few. This aircraft does it all, radar data links, pr-programed missons and much more but i'm not going to get into details since most won't know what i'm talking about anyways.





Dragon Emperor said:


> Wrong timing for Russia. *Why would China want to import a 4th gen fighter with absolutely no stealth when China herself is about to test a 5th gen stealth fighter soon. Russia is so Laughable*.




About to test a '5th gen stealth fighter' is not the same a having a fully operational aircraft. I see you're also neglecting the time span of a test and the time the aircraft is operational, which could take a decade or more, equally as important it will take years to satisfy the demand for such a fighter, and in the mean time you do what...?

Regarding 'stealth' the SU-35 is said to have a rcs as low as 1 m2, that's quite low, lower than most 4 generation fighter.



Pakistani Nationalist said:


> *
> Now i can imagine why india is running around israel for avionics used in russian SU-30 and other jets instead of russia itself?*
> 
> Shoving russian stuff down india??
> 
> .



Make no mistake about it the SU-35 still consists heavely of Russian avionics, also the latest batch of MKI's will receive their upgrades in Russia.



yangtomous said:


> buy su27 that China first time get a main trend 3th fighter,buy su30 that China get a powerful 3th MRCA.what su35 represent .it is a 3.5th fighter *just a little better than su30* ,but can't improve to next generation.SU35 can't became a milestone for PLAAF.now we have long range J11 and middle range J10 .and we also developing our 4th fighter.something that you can't just buy from other.su35 is a better fighter but not necessary.so China wouldn't buy this fighter.
> for the engine ws10 produce 100 per years now.and RD93 is buy for JF17.
> ws15 in on the developing .we didin't stop there just moving on day after day.Russia is a power country ,you help us a lot ,appreciate it.but it doesn't means you can better than China forever. Clam down analyse the situation.Rome was not built in a day.China also.



The SU-35 is superior to the SU-30 in every way, superior radar, superior sensor fussion, superior IRST, superior engines, lower rcs...ect.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Nomenclature

No doubt Su-35 is a capable plane and it's certainly a very attractive package with 117S engines. But the cost will likely be high as well.

Currently we don't really need our first carrier-born aircraft to be a top-notch performer. I mean even with the best aircraft in the world the first Chinese carrier won't reach its full operation capabilities in the first ten years. I think we can afford to take our time, get some J-15s first to familiarize ourselves with carrier operations and refine our aircraft/engine design in the mean time.

Also there's the PR problem, the propaganda people will have a very hard to spin the news if the first Chinese aircraft carriers is ex-Varyag with Su-35BMs.

Reasons I can see to buy SU-35 are a) Thanks the Russians for recent stance with Japan b) For PLA to tell Shenyang that they are not totally dependent on them so they better get their acts together. c) American dollar is losing value, China want to dump them when they worth something. d)Someone in the PLA are getting some fat paychecks from Russia.

Anyway Russians themselves are not at all confident China may order Su-35BMs, otherwise they'll fly a Su-35 to Zhuhai instead of just bringing a model.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Varyag is planned to become a training carrier, doubt PLAN would care much about that piece of 1970s hardware. 

The J-15 is developed from a prototype aircraft from Ukraine, it has little to do with Su-33.


----------



## Lankan Ranger

*The Sukhoi Su-35BM is a Russian 4++ generation heavy class, long-range, multi-role one-seat fighter, that was developed from the original Su-27 fighter.

"Su-35BM" (Bolshaya Modernizatsiya - Big Modernization), Su-35BM entered serial production as the Su-35S.

The modernized Su-35BM was presented at the MAKS-2007 air show in August 2007. The new features of the aircraft include a reinforced airframe with the use of composite materials, a reduced radar signature from the front, and an improved passive electronically scanned array radar. 

The aircraft featured many other upgrades to its avionics and electronic systems, including digital fly-by-wire and a rear-looking radar for firing Semi-Active Radar missiles. 

The new Su-35BM omits the canard and speedbrake; to maintain maneuverability equal to or greater than canard-equipped fighters, the Su-35BM uses the hew 117S engine with fully-rotating vectoring thrust nozzles.

The new Su-35S first flew on 19 February 2008. On 18 August 2009, the Russian Defense Ministry announced a contract for 48 Su-35S fighters to be delivered by 2015.

Specifications (Su-35S)

General characteristics

Crew: 1
Length: 21.9 m (72.9 ft)
Wingspan: 15.3 m (50.2 ft)
Height: 5.90 m (19.4 ft)
Wing area: 62.0 m² (667 ft²)
Empty weight: 18,400 kg (40,570 lb)
Loaded weight: 25,300 kg (56,660 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 34,500 kg (76,060 lb)
Powerplant: 2× Saturn 117S with TVC nozzle turbofan
Dry thrust: 8,800 kgf[46] (86.3 kN, 19,400 lbf) each
Thrust with afterburner: 14,500 kgf (142 kN, 31,900 lbf) each

Performance

Maximum speed: Mach 2.25[40] (2,390 km/h, 1,490 mph) at altitude
Range: 3,600 km (1,940 nmi) ; (1,580 km, 850 nmi near ground level)
Ferry range: 4,500 km (2,430 nmi) with external fuel tanks
Service ceiling: 18,000 m (59,100 ft)
Rate of climb: >280 m/s (>55,100 ft/min)
Wing loading: 408 kg/m² (84.9 lb/ft²)
Thrust/weight: 1.1

Armament

1 × 30 mm GSh-30 internal cannon with 150 rounds
2 × wingtip rails for R-73 (AA-11 "Archer") air-to-air missiles or ECM pods
12 × wing and fuselage stations for up to 8,000 kg (17,630 lb) of ordnance, including for a variety of ordnance including air-to-air missiles, air-to-surface missiles, rockets, and bombs such as:
AA-10 Alamo: R-27R, R-27ER, R-27T, R-27ET, R-27EP, R-27AE
AA-12 Adder: R-77, and the proposed R-77M1, R-77T
AA-11 Archer: R-73E, R-73M, R-74M
AS-17 Krypton: Kh-31A, Kh-31P Anti-Radiation Missile
AS-20: Kh-59
AS-14 Kedge: Kh-29T, Kh-29L
KAB-500 Laser-guided bomb
KAB-1500 Laser-guided bomb
LGB-250 laser-guided bomb
FAB-250 250kg unguided bombs
FAB-500 500kg unguided bombs
S-25LD laser-guided rocket, S-250 unguided rocket
B-8 unguided S-8 rocket pods
B-13 unguided S-13 rocket pods

Avionics

Irbis-E passive phased array radar


*


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

ptldM3 said:


> Make no mistake about it the SU-35 still consists heavely of Russian avionics, also the latest batch of MKI's will receive their upgrades in Russia.



I was tryin to explain the explain to the guy why JF-17s new avionics are being tested and searched frm EU......... Just bcoz ur getting something new doesnt mean the original is not worth it.

Reguarding upgrades i wonder wat they r? coz i can bet it tht the indians will only talk abt israeli avionics as if they were sent by God.


Reguarding su-35 offer to china..... do u think they will buy it? after making J-15? my bet is NO.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Su-35 is indeed a nice aircraft, however current PLAAF has no place to fit it, maybe it would be wiser to sell these aircrafts to the countries like Malaysia, Indonesia or Vietnam.


----------



## Lankan Ranger

*potential orders*

*The Su-35S is participating in Brazil's F-X2 contest. Anatoly Isaikin, general director of Rosoboronexport, declared on 6 October 2009 that the company will provide 120 fighters & full transfer of technology. 

On 16 November, 2010, Rosoboronexport said that it was ready to hold talkes with China on the delivery of advanced Su-35S fighter aircraft to the Chinese air force.*

*Orders*

*Venezuela ordered 24 Su-35S fighters.
Libya ordered 12 Su-35S fighters. *


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

PLAAF has lost the interest of purchasing Su-35 since 2005.


----------



## Nomenclature

My mistake. I actually thought Su-35BM is Russia's new carrier-based aircraft. 

As Su-35BM has nothing to do with carriers, I really don't see any chance for it to be induced to PLAAF. I mean even if China do want to place some big arms order for the sake of improving relation with Russia, S-400 or IL76 would be much more natural choices.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Nomenclature said:


> My mistake. I actually though Su-35BM is Russia's new carrier-based aircraft.
> 
> As Su-35BM has nothing to do with carriers, I really don't see any chance for it to be induced to PLAAF. I mean even if China do want to place some big arms order for the sake of improving relation with Russia, *S-400 or IL76 would be much more natural choices*.



Soon we don't need to buy these anymore, however Russia is still a big marketplace to buy more of natural resources.


----------



## Lankan Ranger




----------



## AMCA

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> I was tryin to explain the explain to the guy why JF-17s new avionics are being tested and searched frm EU......... Just bcoz ur getting something new doesnt mean the original is not worth it.
> 
> Reguarding upgrades i wonder wat they r? coz i can bet it tht the indians will only talk abt israeli avionics as if they were sent by God.
> 
> 
> Reguarding su-35 offer to china..... do u think they will buy it? after making J-15? my bet is NO.



Sorry for Interrupting, Russians are great, Probably the best when It comes to Designing an Aircraft to the core of Agility and Maneuverability, There is Nothing wrong or difficult in Obtaining Russian Avionics But Most of the Avionics are Of Russian Origin and a Few Indian and a Few Indo-Israeli Joint venture Such as the Mayawi EW Suit....

And Upgrades, Its Necessary For You to know since You speak a Lot being Ignorant about the facts....If You at anytime Want to know regarding Upgrades You are free to ask me... Any time sir


----------



## Lankan Ranger




----------



## Lankan Ranger



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

AMCA said:


> Sorry for Interrupting, Russians are great, Probably the best when It comes to Designing an Aircraft to the core of Agility and Maneuverability, There is Nothing wrong or difficult in Obtaining Russian Avionics But Most of the Avionics are Of Russian Origin and a Few Indian and a Few Indo-Israeli Joint venture Such as the Mayawi EW Suit....
> 
> And Upgrades, Its Necessary For You to know since You speak a Lot being Ignorant about the facts....If You at anytime Want to know regarding Upgrades You are free to ask me... Any time sir



Indeed Russian planes are great, so they can keep these planes for themselves. The main point is that China doesn't need them right now, indeed we have lot of foreign reserves, however why we have to burn off more money to purchase something we don't need?


----------



## Lankan Ranger




----------



## Lankan Ranger




----------



## AMCA

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Indeed Russian planes are great, so they can keep these for themselves. The main point is that China doesn't need them right now, indeed we have lot of foreign reserves, however why we have to burn off more money to purchase something we don't need?



Come on sir, No one is Compelling you to buy.... An Offer made is an added Choice for the PLAAF to get its Hand on, If China doesnt want it so be It.... But calling it as a Joke or anything Inferior is surely a gesture of Disrespect shown towards who have been equipping you for decades... Agreed China can Make aircrafts But that dosent give any of you the License to Criticize the Old Arms dealer of Yours....

Hope I am Clear


----------



## Lankan Ranger




----------



## Lankan Ranger




----------



## ChineseTiger1986

AMCA said:


> Come on sir, No one is Compelling you to buy.... An Offer made is an added Choice for the PLAAF to get its Hand on, If China doesnt want it so be It.... But calling it as a Joke or anything Inferior is surely a gesture of Disrespect shown towards who have been equipping you for decades... Agreed China can Make aircrafts But that dosent give any of you the License to Criticize the Old Arms dealer of Yours....
> 
> Hope I am Clear



I hope those Russian arms dealers could leave us alone. 

And stop making daily news about China.


----------



## ptldM3

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I hope those Russian arms dealers could leave us alone.
> 
> And stop making daily news about China.



And who approached who with the RD-93?  Like it or not China has approached Russia for many of it's defense needs, this is not just strictly a buyer seller relationship. China has asked for and received assistance in radar development as well as cruise missle technology.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## INDIAN007

I Think India Should Purchase some of them ... what say


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ptldM3 said:


> And who approached who with the RD-93?



As I said before, a temporary replacement for single-engined jet like J-10 and JF-17. China won't prematurely use WS-10A or other variants for J-10 or JF-17. 

But no thanks, we don't need anything else.


----------



## AMCA

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I hope those Russian arms dealers could leave us alone.
> 
> And stop making daily news about China.



You speak as if they are falling at your feet.... If a good Will Gestures Seems to you u as an act of Disturbing then They should have been the first one to say to you when you approach them for engines to run your esteemed Fighters.....


----------



## Lankan Ranger




----------



## ChineseTiger1986

INDIAN007 said:


> I Think India Should Purchase some of them ... what say



I am indeed happy to see Su-35 to find its rightful buyers, hopefully India is one of them.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

AMCA said:


> You speak as if they are falling at your feet.... If a good Will Gestures Seems to you u as an act of Disturbing then *They should have been the first one to say to you when you approach them for engines to run your esteemed Fighters*.....



Read my previous posts please...


----------



## ptldM3

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> As i said before, a temporary replacement for single-engined jet like J-10 and JF-17. China won't prematurely use WS-10A or other variants for J-10 or JF-17.
> 
> *But no thanks, we don't need anything else*.



And who are you to say that?


----------



## AMCA

INDIAN007 said:


> I Think India Should Purchase some of them ... what say



Well, Yeah U see.... Our Strategic Command is Needing 40+ Fighter Bombers With an Ability to carry Nuclear capable cruise Missile such as the Brahmos, I would recommend We Buy the Su 35 Instead of the Su 30 MKI ... I guess *ptldM3 *Could Brief Us about it....


----------



## AMCA

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Read my previous posts please...



I have Thats is why I posted it!!!


----------



## Lankan Ranger

*Don&#8217;t compare Su-35S (Su-35MB) with J-11, J-11B & J-11BS

For now Su-35S fighter Superior then J-11, J-11B & J-11BS
*


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ptldM3 said:


> And who are you to say that?



Over 99% of chance that they won't introduce any Su-35, what do I need to say more?


----------



## ptldM3

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Over 99&#37; of chance that they won't introduce any Su-35, what do I need to say more?



Unlike some people here I&#8217;m not Houdini, thus I do not predict future events with mathematical probability but, in my opinion, the su-35 has a good chance of being introduced into the Chinese air force, the only problem would likely be orders, remember Sukhoi was hesitant to sell the SU-33 because the order was too small. Part of this was due to fear that China may study the systems onboard the SU-33 and make something similar. 

If China does not end up purchasing the SU-35 i certainly see them showing interest in the SU-35's avionics as they did in the past.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ptldM3 said:


> Unlike some people here *I&#8217;m not Houdini, thus I do not predict future events with mathematical probability but, in my opinion, the su-35 has a good chance of being introduced into the Chinese air force*, the only problem would likely be orders, remember Sukhoi was hesitant to sell the SU-33 because the order was too small. Part of this was due to fear that China may study the systems onboard the SU-33 and make something similar.
> 
> If China does not end up purchasing the SU-35 i certainly see them showing interest in the SU-35's avionics as they did in the past.



Full of contradiction, no proof that PLAAF would intend to introduce any Su-35 variants. 

Leave China alone, you may find many other buyers from the world market.


----------



## ptldM3

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Full of contradiction, no proof of PLAAF would intend to introduce any Su-35 variants.
> 
> Leave China alone, you may find many other buyers from the world market.



I stated it was my opinion, i also mentioned that Chinese officials were interested in the SU-35's avionics. And you really do look silly when you use phrases such as 'leave China alone', China comes to Russia, do you understand that? We do not force China to purchase our equipment at gun point, China comes to us.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ptldM3 said:


> I stated it was my opinion, i also mentioned that Chinese officials were interested in the SU-35's avionics. And you really do look silly when you use phrases such as 'leave China alone', China comes to Russia, do you understand that? We do not force China to purchase our equipment at gun point, China comes to us.



avionics =/= a complete aircraft (maybe back in 2005 China showed some interests)

The problem is that "Russia has intended to sell it", but that doesn't mean "China has intention to buy it". 

And please don't confuse us with India, who are Russia's largest arms buyers. Recently we are busy to develop many of our indigenous products, and don't expect any foreign products to meddle the development.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yangtomous

su35 is a superior fighter but not indispensable for China.may be just want buy one or two we can learn something from it .but this is impossible, Russia can't let it happen.for a large number also impossible .this is China way, not indispensable is the reason.
IL76 more important than that , it is our blank areas .

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## a_chinese

been viewing these threads for years and i recently just registered hoping these stupid little arguments change but nope same bullshit. Indian vs China **** then it becomes some other gay argument. Seriously man, who the **** cares if China buys it or not.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nomenclature

^^^
Yeah, China need IL76 far more than it needs Su-35BM, and the price for IL76 is probably a lot less inflated comparing to what Russia will charge for Su-35BM. I won't believe a Su-35BM deal unless a IL76 deal comes first.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Nomenclature said:


> ^^^
> Yeah, China need IL76 far more than it needs Su-35BM, and the price for IL76 is probably a lot less inflated comparing to what Russia will charge for Su-35BM. I won't believe a Su-35BM deal unless a IL76 deal comes first.



That's right, IL76 is still a useful airplatform that we are going to use for a while until 2016. 

But Su-35MB is totally unnecessary.


----------



## aimarraul

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Full of contradiction, no proof that PLAAF would intend to introduce any Su-35 variants.



it wouldn't hurt to do some marketing for our russian partners,why do people only argue over the news instead of reading the political implications behind it..it doesn't matter if china is going to purchese su-35 and S-400 or not,C-R military cooperation back on the right track


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

aimarraul said:


> it wouldn't hurt to do some marketing for our russian partners,why do people only argue over the news instead of reading the political implications behind it..it doesn't matter if china is going to purchese su-35 and S-400 or not,C-R military cooperation back on the right track



"Political implications" always ruined everything, we are supposed to have fair trade, not charity. They can just dump anything that we don't even need to us.


----------



## ptldM3

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> "Political implications" always ruined everything, we are supposed to have fair trade, not charity. *They can just dump anything that we don't even need to us*.




They offer thier products just like Lockheed or Dasault offers theirs, there is no 'dumping'. Most would consider it a privilage rather than 'dumping'.


----------



## huzihaidao12

I think that is possible, not entirely impossible. 

1, SU35 is still an advanced aircraft 

2, the defense needs, whether China has enough production to meet defense requirements. Therefore, imports of some advanced aircraft is not impossible. 

3, a number of other things, such as bundled deal and even political transactions.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

huzihaidao12 said:


> I think that is possible
> 
> 1, SU35 is still an advanced aircraft
> 
> 2, the defense needs, whether China has enough production to meet defense requirements. Therefore, imports of some advanced aircraft is not impossible.
> 
> 3, a number of other things, such as bundled deal and even political transactions.



Very likely, as for introducing the new aircrafts, the development of J-14 has already eaten up most of the budgets.


----------



## aimarraul

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Very likely, as for introducing new aircrafts, the development of J-14 has already eaten up most of the budgets.



J-14......what the hell is it


----------



## luckyyy

which of the aircrafts presently in chinese airforce that has the legs to cross the himalays other then su-30mkk.........??


----------



## nightcrawler

SU-35 is a great fighter; no doubt that I placed it 2nd to F-22 in top ten Fighter thread

here's why I placed it 2nd; this the most recent article I can get as of 2009-10
Super Flanker SU-35 - Fullscreen


don't worry you don't have to download; its *streaming* pdf link


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

aimarraul said:


> J-14......what the hell is it



Sorry, I mean J-XX, maybe J-14 is an inofficial name.


----------



## aimarraul

luckyyy said:


> which of the aircrafts presently in chinese airforce that has the legs to cross the himalays other then su-30mkk.........??



you can measure the distance between tibet and New Delhi&#65292;every jets besides J-7

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

luckyyy said:


> which of the aircrafts presently in chinese airforce that has the legs to cross the himalays other then su-30mkk.........??



I think you should mean how the Indian Airforce could cross China's border? 

No joke, our artilleries are enough to wipe out Delhi off the map in matter of seconds. We don't even need "to cross the Himalaya".

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Nomenclature

Su-35 is a very good plane. I don't think anyone should object buying them as long as it won't affect funding to indigenous projects. China's early Russian made Su-27 fleet is quite old now anyway, replace them with new Russian made Su-35BM could be an option.

Also introducing some outside competition will in the long run be good for Chinese military aviation industry.

Still I find the news very suspicious.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## INDIAN007

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I think you should mean how the Indian Airforce could cross China's border?
> 
> No joke, our artillery is enough to wipe out Delhi off the map in matter of seconds. We don't even need "to cross the Himalaya".




*Good Joke , Good Joke *


----------



## Nomenclature

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I think you should mean how the Indian Airforce could cross China's border?
> 
> No joke, our artilleries are enough to wipe out Delhi off the map in matter of seconds. We don't even need "to cross the Himalaya".



Let's be realistic. Do you know how many shells are needed to flat a major city? Even the fabled North Korean artillery will need hours or more likely days to flat Seoul.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Nomenclature said:


> Su-35 is a very good plane. I don't think anyone should object buying them as long as it won't affect funding to indigenous projects. China's early Russian made Su-27 fleet is quite old now anyway, replace them with new Russian made Su-35BM could be an option.
> 
> Also introducing some outside competition will in the long run be good for Chinese military aviation industry.
> 
> Still I find the news very suspicious.



Old school Su-27s were already failling apart, now they were most retired from the service. 







I think China's own weapons have most fit China's need.

---------- Post added at 01:26 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:25 AM ----------




Nomenclature said:


> Let's be realistic. Do you know how many shells are needed to flat a major city? Even the fabled North Korean artillery will need hours or more likely days to flat Seoul.



That was a feedback to the troll.


----------



## Brotherhood

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I think you should mean how the Indian Airforce could cross China's border?
> 
> No joke, our artillery is enough to wipe out Delhi off the map in matter of seconds. We don't even need "to cross the Himalaya".



The problem is Indians never wanted to address any issues thats to their disavantage like thousands of missiles, guides rockets which could bomb them back to stone age.
They could be so ignorant that one time an Indian member even thought the so-called Himalaya barrier could stop "Ballistic Missiles"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## INDIAN007

Brotherhood said:


> The problem is Indians never wanted to address any issues thats to their disavantage like thousands of missiles, guides rockets which could bomb them back to stone age.
> They could be so ignorant that one time an Indian member even thought the so-called Himalaya barrier could stop "Ballistic Missiles"



The Topic Is ' *Russia ready to sell Su-35 fighter jets to China* '

so why bring INDIA in middle - dont reply to Trolls and derail the thread - stick to topic


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Brotherhood said:


> The problem is Indians never wanted to address any issues thats to their disavantage like thousands of missiles, guides rockets which could bomb them back to stone age.
> They could be so ignorant that one time an Indian member even thought the so-called Himalaya barrier could stop "Ballistic Missiles"



This is good tactic to deal with flamebaiting troll.


----------



## cloneman

Just confirmed from the Chinese insider,the potential Su35BM deal is a joke.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Last Hope

*WHY* would CHINA buy them from RUSSIA??
They have sets of J10s and many other jets !!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## luckyyy

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I think you should mean how the Indian Airforce could cross China's border?
> 
> No joke, our artilleries are enough *to wipe out Delhi off the map in matter of seconds.* We don't even need "to cross the Himalaya".





Brotherhood said:


> The problem is Indians never wanted to address any issues thats to their disavantage like* thousands of missiles, guides rockets which could bomb them back to stone age*.
> They could be so ignorant that one time an Indian member even thought the so-called Himalaya barrier could stop "Ballistic Missiles"



we know your intentions , no need to display it ...


----------



## dingyibvs

luckyyy said:


> which of the aircrafts presently in chinese airforce that has the legs to cross the himalays other then su-30mkk.........??



With aerial refueling, just about all of them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pzkilo

Lidsky said:


> This one is not that su-35. This is a further modernization wich uses 5th gen elements. Production in Russia only started this year and this is a brand new fighter. Also, the earlier su-35 was not sold because of the copying scandal, not for another issue.



I can only say rofl

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pzkilo

&#29141;&#38592;&#28937;&#30693;&#40511;&#40516;&#20043;&#24535;, &#36825;&#20123;&#20010;&#20667;&#24125;&#36824;&#25972;&#22825;&#35828;&#21035;&#20154;copy,&#31505;&#27515;&#25105;&#20102;&#12290;

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## pzkilo

AMCA said:


> Whats a *"JOKE"* In this??? , Is this the fist time u are buying a Russian stuff that you call it a joke?



Did china buy any fighters from RUS in past several years? I have to say u know nothing about China. 

&#29141;&#38592;&#28937;&#30693;&#40511;&#40516;&#20043;&#24535;

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Luftwaffe

Look SU-35BM is the finest out there going to be fielded by Russia, but China has so many project up her sleeves. The development of J-11 variants; I'm sure they are watching and developing it further to atleast be close to SU-35. When you have projects in progress do expect advancements.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## unicorn148

pzkilo said:


> Did china buy any fighters from RUS in past several years? I have to say u know nothing about China.
> 
> &#29141;&#38592;&#28937;&#30693;&#40511;&#40516;&#20043;&#24535;



China got su-30Mk2 version which is most powerful of the whole PLAAF and there even there is no plane in PLAAF which is more capable than the SU-35 because even J10B can not counter it


----------



## Vimana1

Russia May Sell Su-35s to China - Defense News


More on this news


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

unicorn148 said:


> China got su-30Mk2 version which is most powerful of the whole PLAAF and there even there is no plane in PLAAF which is more capable than the SU-35 because even J10B can not counter it



Yeah, Russian fighters are so powerful, so they can keep it for themselves. Anyway we don't need any of them!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gypgypgyp

unicorn148 said:


> China got su-30Mk2 version which is most powerful of the whole PLAAF and there even there is no plane in PLAAF which is more capable than the SU-35 because even J10B can not counter it



you dreaming. How do you define most powerful?

In A2A, J-10A certainly better than Su-30

In attack role, JH-7A on the par

You know Su-30MKK even do not has IFFC, how good it can be?

Multi-role doesn't mean it is the best in every aspect


And Su-30 contract was sign nearly decade ago.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

gypgypgyp said:


> And Su-30 contract was sign nearly decade ago.



Mostly in the mid of 1990s, as I remembered that PLAAF first introduced them back in 1999.


----------



## nightcrawler

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Yeah, Russian fighters are so powerful, so they can keep it for themselves. Anyway we don't need any of them!!!




Now this is what we can laugh about


----------



## graphican

Chinese about to launch - J-14


----------



## graphican

At this stage, may be Pakistan wouldn't like to buy Su-35 because prospects of J-10 based J-xx are great. Yes Russians realized what they are loosing after they actually lost it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nightcrawler

look J-xx & what be the further J--- series are not operational yet; then for sure as hell SU-35 must be an excellent choice


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Russians themselves still depends on French Avionics, if we really desperately need to import Avionics Systems, then we should go after France, not Russia. 

This is the indigenous Russian Avionics Systems for Su-34.


----------



## no_name

^^^ For SU-34, does both pilots eject at the same time in emergency?


----------



## CONNAN

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I think you should mean how the Indian Airforce could cross China's border?
> 
> No joke, our artilleries are enough to wipe out Delhi off the map in matter of seconds. We don't even need "to cross the Himalaya".



lol no artillery in this planet has such a long rage where you can shell it from tibet to wipe out Delhi


----------



## no_name

He's probably talking about rocket artillery.


----------



## CONNAN

no_name said:


> He's probably talking about rocket artillery.



till now the longest range of rocket artillery is 100 kms ofcourse he can do it with missile battery

a missile battery and rocket artillery are 2 different platforms


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

China's longest ranged Rocket Artillery WS-2D is about 480km.


----------



## CONNAN

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> China's longest ranged Rocket Artillery WS-2D is about 480km.



thats intresting but still not enough range to shell Delhi

the distance between Tibet and Delhi is Distance: 1,355 km / 842 miles






to do it you need to be in some were near kanpur in UTTER PRADESH STATE then 480km range will be enough to do the job


----------



## CardSharp

connanxlrc1000 said:


> thats intresting but still not enough range to shell Delhi
> 
> the distance between Tibet and Delhi is Distance: 1,355 km / 842 miles



This is just awesomely bad logic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CONNAN

CardSharp said:


> This is just awesomely bad logic.



then tell me how can a 480 km range rocket artillery in tibet can shell delhi


----------



## CardSharp

connanxlrc1000 said:


> then tell me how can a 480 km range rocket artillery in tibet can shell delhi



Take a compass, measure 480 km to whatever scale map you are using. Center it on Delhi and draw a circle. The area where the circle overlaps Chinese controlled territory is the area of operations for rocket artillery.


----------



## CONNAN

CardSharp said:


> Take a compass, measure 480 km to whatever scale map you are using. Center it on Delhi and draw a circle. The area where the circle overlaps Chinese controlled territory is the area of operations for rocket artillery.



that what i measured using google earth even if you place on the border your rocket artillary cannot reach new delhi


----------



## CardSharp

Also this is the kind of compass I'm talking about 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compass_(drafting)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## no_name

connanxlrc1000 said:


> till now the longest range of rocket artillery is 100 kms ofcourse he can do it with missile battery
> 
> a missile battery and rocket artillery are 2 different platforms



Maybe that's the case for western artillery systems.

BP-12A long-range, GPS guided rocket, on display at China Air Show 2010. :

China Defense Blog: BP-12A long-range, GPS guided rocket, on display at China Air Show 2010.

This new BP-12A VLS rocket system has a module warhead design that can fit different munitions in accordance to different mission profiles. Its SY400 based motor propels it to a range up to 400 KM, making it one of the longest, non-Ballistic, rockets available today.


----------



## CONNAN

CardSharp said:


> Also this is the kind of compass I'm talking about
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compass_(drafting)



this is the same thing i am talking about


----------



## no_name

connanxlrc1000 said:


> that what i measured using google earth even if you place on the border your rocket artillary cannot reach new delhi



You are probably confusing Tibet with Lhasa, the artillery system does not need to be at the tibet capital.


----------



## CONNAN

CardSharp said:


> Also this is the kind of compass I'm talking about
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compass_(drafting)



well i am also talking about the same thing


----------



## CONNAN

no_name said:


> You are probably confusing Tibet with Lhasa, the artillery system does not need to be at the tibet capital.



yup i am not telling that it should be in Lhasa that map was just to give a rough idea even if you place the rocket artillery on the borders still you are out of range as far as new Delhi is concerned

but i agree that your missiles can reach beyond delhi it s known fact no doubt in that


----------



## CardSharp

There I did it for you.

_500km Scale at the bottom left. _


----------



## CONNAN

CardSharp said:


> There I did it for you.
> 
> _500km Scale at the bottom left. _



but according to my calculations your longest artillery range falls 120 kms short technically speaking

my calculations might be wrong but thank you good discussion


----------



## wali87

connanxlrc1000 said:


> yup i am not telling that it should be in Lhasa that map was just to give a rough idea even if you place the rocket artillery on the borders still you are out of range as far as new Delhi is concerned
> 
> but i agree that your missiles can reach beyond delhi it s known fact no doubt in that




If u place the artilleries on the border its just 365kms away.. WELL WITHIN RANGE... u have in-accurate figures or perhaps u JUST DONT WANT TO UNDERSTAND by the looks of it.. DENIAL? haha 

Hope it helps


----------



## CONNAN

wali87 said:


> Someone please explain to this Idiot that Tibet is not a city... ITS A BLOODY PROVINCE! now get back to work with the compass you have been told about... and try figuring it out oncee again..!
> 
> Hope it helps



cant we just have a healthy discussion if you cant then makes u an idiot


----------



## CardSharp

connanxlrc1000 said:


> but according to my calculations your longest artillery range falls 120 kms short technically speaking
> 
> my calculations might be wrong but thank you good discussion



You don't need calculations for ranges on a scale map. Assuming you know which projection the map uses and at what scale they are applicable.


----------



## CONNAN

wali87 said:


> If u place the artilleries on the border its just 365kms away.. WELL WITHIN RANGE... u have in accurate figures or perhaps u JUST DONT WANT TO UNDERSTAND
> 
> Hope it helps



just read the post above i said i might be wrong there is no need to post compass pictures and make things personal dont we and i am working as a marine engineer for the last 6 years i know what is a compass

and also every calculation need not to be accurate if its wrong i admit it but i never make personal comments like u


----------



## no_name

connanxlrc1000 said:


> my calculations might be wrong but thank you good discussion



Did you use 400km for radius (not diameter)?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nightcrawler

Russia Delivers More Helicopters to China
ZHUHAI, China: The Russian multi-role heavy transport helicopter Mi-26T&#1057; manufactured by Rostvertol JSC, a subsidiary of the Russian Helicopters holding company, was officially delivered to its customer and arrived in China not long before Airshow China 2010 opening tomorrow in Zhuhai.

The contract for the delivery of the heavy Mi-26T&#1057; to the Peoples Republic of China was signed between Rostvertol JSC and Lectern Aviation Supplies Co., Ltd. (China) in March 2010. This is the third Mi-26TC sold by Rostvertol in the PRC. The Mi-26TC was completed three months before the due date set in the contract pursuant to the request from the Chinese side. The new heavy Mi-26TC is scheduled to serve in one of the fire-hazardous regions of China and put out forest fires.

Besides, a new contract is in the works with Lectern Aviation for the purchase of another Mi-26TC. According to experts, the Chinese market sees high demand for the type of tasks the heavy Russian Mi-26TC can handle.

A contract is in execution by Russian Helicopters to deliver 32 multi-role Mi-171E helicopters manufactured by Ulan-Ude Aviation Plant (UUAP) to China. UUAP has already delivered 24 Mi-171 helicopters to a Chinese customer in 2007.

Chinese aviation market specialists will have an opportunity to find out more about these and other Russian rotorcraft at Airshow China 2010 in Hall 1 at Stand A1-AB, at the Russian Helicopters booth, which will be a part of the exposition of United Industrial Corporation Oboronprom, a part of Russian Technologies State Corporation. The Chinese market will be shown the light multi-role Ansat and Ka-226T, medium Mi-17 and Ka-32A11BC type helicopters, the new medium-to-heavy Mi-38, and the combat Mi-35M, Mi-28N Night Hunter, and the Ka-52 Alligator.

The medium multi-role Ka-32A11BC is certified in China. Russian Helicopters holding company is currently holding talks to deliver a large number of Ka-32A11BC helicopters for use in rescue and firefighting operations.

Apart from China, the Ka-32A11BC is certified in the European Union, Chile, Mexico, South Korea, Canada, and other countries. Its outstanding performance and capability of working with external loads in difficult high-mountain and high-temperature conditions have sparked interest in this helicopter in many countries. The helicopter has proven itself extremely efficient in firefighting operations.

The Ka-32A11BC is designed by Kamov, a subsidiary of Russian Helicopters, and built by Kumertau Aviation Production Enterprise, also a subsidiary of the holding company. This classic coaxial (dual) rotor helicopter can carry passengers and loads and can also be used in high-rise construction and surveillance. It can also perform search and rescue missions and combat fires.

Ka-32 helicopters of various modification are successfully operated in Spain, Portugal, Switzerland, and outside Europe  in Canada, South Korea, Chile, Mexico, Taiwan, Japan, China, Papua New Guinea, and other countries. The fleet of Ka-32 helicopters in South Korea exceeds 60  they are top scorers in the Forestry Service (firefighting) and the Coast Guard.

A service centre will open in Qindao within the framework of the joint Sino-Russian Helicopter Service Company Ltd. enterprise to service and maintain Russian rotorcraft and offer aftersale service to newly-delivered Russian rotorcraft in China. The centre will offer a number of maintenance and repair services.

The creation of a service centre in China  a traditional market for Russian Helicopters  is an important step in the change of strategy from selling just the helicopter itself to selling the entire lifecycle of a helicopter including aftersale service and modern training means.

The existing MRO infrastructure matches the sales geography of Russian Helicopters. An Indian centre is currently in the works as a joint venture named Integrated Helicopter Services Pvt. Ltd. A service centre is online in Vietnam. Several service centres and companies are under certification in Europe to create an integrated logistics support system in the region. The service network covers almost all CIS countries. Support facilities will open in South-East Asia, Latin America, and Central and Southern Africa.

Russian Helicopters, JSC is an affiliated company of UIC Oboronprom. It is the managing body of the following helicopter industry enterprises: Mil Moscow Helicopter Plant, Kamov, Ulan-Ude Aviation Plant, Kazan Helicopters, Rostvertol, Arsenyev Aviation Company, Progress named after N.I. Sazykin, Kumertau Aviation Production Enterprise, Vpered Moscow Machine-Building Plant, Stupino Machine Production Plant, Reductor-PM, Novosibirsk Aircraft Repairing Plant, and Helicopter Service Company.

Partners of Russian Helicopters: AirTaxi Service (interior completions and maintenance); R.E.T. Kronshtadt (sea and aviation training systems, military navigation and avionics); Tranzas (software, navigation systems, aviation simulators for sea and river fleets); CSTC Dinamika (development, manufacture, and aftersale service of the full scope of technical training means for military and civil aviation flight and engineering personnel); BETA AIR (testing equipment and aviation electronics); Ural Works of Civil Aviation (specialises in the repair of helicopter engines and components and reductors).

UIC Oboronprom, JSC is a multi-profile industrial and investment group established in 2002. A part of State Corporation Rostekhnologii. Its main tasks include helicopter engineering (Russian Helicopters managing company) and engine-building (United Engine Industry Corporation managing company).

http://www.****************/russia-delivers-more-helicopters-to-china-30125/


----------



## Akasa

Don't bother.

We have J-11B and J-15 in inventory.

And we are testing a new stealthy J-11 variant.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

SinoSoldier said:


> Don't bother.
> 
> We have J-11B and J-15 in inventory.
> 
> And we are testing a new stealthy J-11 variant.



And don't forget J-XX, that is the most crucial of all.


----------



## siegecrossbow

Comeon guys get back on topic. Let us not turn this into another China vs. India vs. Russia mud-fest.


----------



## GodlessBastard

siegecrossbow said:


> Comeon guys get back on topic. Let us not turn this into another China vs. India vs. Russia mud-fest.



This is PDF what else do you expect?


----------



## conworldus

Why buy Su-35 when we have J-11B?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## fusong

time has chang ,we dont need this aircraft because we have better one.


----------



## lcloo

The article is about Russian wants to sell this SU-35 to China, it is Russian marketing for for much wanted money to further fund their future stealth fighters. Whether China will accept the offer is not known.

Since Russia is building the PAK-FA, Su-35 is considered only a stop gap fighter, or an advance fighter for countries not able to afford stealth fighters, it will also be a future major export jet of Russia for earning foreign exchange.

China's J-XX will be more advance, and further development of J-10 and J-11 incorporating J-XX technology may have similar capabilities of SU-35. It will be waste of funds to buy and there will be more logistic/maintainance burden with another type of advance fighter.


----------



## no_name

I think Su-35's place is a bit like eurofighter.


----------



## nightcrawler

no_name said:


> I think Su-35's place is a bit like eurofighter.



I think Su-35's place is a bit like F-35


----------



## siegecrossbow

nightcrawler said:


> I think Su-35's place is a bit like F-35



One is a stealth and light fighter while the other is a heavy non-stealth fighter. Not exactly the best of comparison there.


----------



## Akasa

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> And don't forget J-XX, that is the most crucial of all.



And that, too.

Even if China orders the Su-35, it would take at least 4-5 years for fully delivery. By that time, J-13 and J-14 stealth fighter would be in service.


----------



## Dragon Emperor

China doesn't need Su-35. If China should import anything from Russia, it should be the the Tu-160 Bomber.


----------



## nightcrawler

siegecrossbow said:


> One is a stealth and light fighter while the other is a heavy non-stealth fighter. Not exactly the best of comparison there.



This entails which plane I buy given the choices b/w the two!!

By the way this isn't what I say; I just quoted Carlo Kopp....though in the coming replies to this I speculate a heavy usage of word *bias* by our US oriented men


----------



## Fennecus

Some Chinese members here need to calm down. 

The Su-35BM is a mighty fine bird. China should buy cause 

a) It's a top range and quality flanker that could help fill the stop gap till the J-XX sees the light of day.

b) Possible engine tech transfer could be very attractive. 

c) We're sitting on a mountain of dollars.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DesiGuy

let's build more advance stuff. f35, su 35...i mean ca'mon. they will run out of gas after some time. 

build a jet fighter that can travel 20-30 times speed of sound and can go into space and than come back to earth. now that is the advance technology.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Fennecus said:


> Some Chinese members here need to calm down.
> 
> The Su-35BM is a mighty fine bird. China should buy cause
> 
> a) It's a top range and quality flanker that could help fill the stop gap till the J-XX sees the light of day.
> 
> b) Possible engine tech transfer could be very attractive.
> 
> c) We're sitting on a mountain of dollars.



It is wasteful to purchase these birds when we have J-XX in the corner, this isn't 1990s anymore.


----------



## aimarraul

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> It is wasteful to purchase these birds when we have J-XX in the corner, this isn't 1990s anymore.



Lin is giving unprincipled protection to 112 for years&#65292;they didn't learn from the mistakes,but instead is still slack in production management ,AF probably just want to give them a lesson


----------



## wakapdf

su 35 is a beautiful aircraft. china should take the opportunity and buy it. They can do the same thing they did with su27/ J11B. produce a couple with full ToT than replicate it and call it J12B.


----------



## Mani2020

Su-35 is the most closest thing to Mki's and often called as twin brothers ,China should go for su-35 and master it ,try to learn the strengths and weakness so they can exploit the weakness of mki's in case of war .

Also the type of economic boom China is having ,buying 50-60 of these su-35's will not make much difference also the platform shares similarities with Su-30MKK in service with PLAAF so pilot training or maintaining will not be a much of issue.

And Su-35 will provide PLAAF pilots with TVC platform and little inside of the TVC technology to Chinese engineers which can later be used to incorporate TVS in locally made engines 

These are all pluses

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pzkilo

Fennecus said:


> Some Chinese members here need to calm down.
> 
> The Su-35BM is a mighty fine bird. China should buy cause
> 
> a) It's a top range and quality flanker that could help fill the stop gap till the J-XX sees the light of day.
> 
> b) Possible engine tech transfer could be very attractive.
> 
> c) We're sitting on a mountain of dollars.



I have to say u no nothing about china.. just be quiet.
&#20320;&#26681;&#26412;&#23601;&#19981;&#25026;&#65292; &#20013;&#22269;&#19981;&#20250;&#20877;&#20080;&#25972;&#26426;&#65292; &#27515;&#20102;&#36825;&#24515;&#21543;&#12290;


----------



## pzkilo

Mani2020 said:


> Su-35 is the most closest thing to Mki's and often called as twin brothers ,China should go for su-35 and master it ,try to learn the strengths and weakness so they can exploit the weakness of mki's in case of war .
> 
> Also the type of economic boom China is having ,buying 50-60 of these su-35's will not make much difference also the platform shares similarities with Su-30MKK in service with PLAAF so pilot training or maintaining will not be a much of issue.
> 
> And Su-35 will provide PLAAF pilots with TVC platform and little inside of the TVC technology to Chinese engineers which can later be used to incorporate TVS in locally made engines
> 
> These are all pluses


China will not buy su35. Believe it or not, it s up to u.


----------



## Mani2020

pzkilo said:


> China will not buy su35. Believe it or not, it s up to u.



I m not imposing my idea upon you.i explained what i thought will be beneficial .Rest PLAAF knows better what is best for them


----------



## PRACTICAL PATRIOT

seems like move from china to push INDIA towards su 35 in mmrca.


----------



## Dragon Emperor

China already has JXX so China need not buy the Su-35, since it is far inferior to JXX(JXX is on the level of F-22 and PAK-FA.)


----------



## Mani2020

PRACTICAL PATRIOT said:


> seems like move from china to push INDIA towards su 35 in mmrca.





Su-35 is not competing in MMRCA deal


----------



## Shak

CardSharp said:


> You bore me.



Realities will always boar you.


----------



## aimarraul

pzkilo said:


> China will not buy su35. Believe it or not, it s up to u.



take it easy,man......he was only providing a suggestion


----------



## LURKER

Military strength eludes China, which looks overseas for arms
MOSCOW - The Moscow Machine-Building Enterprise Salyut on the east side of town has put up a massive Soviet-style poster advertising its need for skilled workers. The New Year's party at the Chernyshev plant in a northwest suburb featured ballet dancers twirling on the stage of its Soviet-era Palace of Culture.

The reason for the economic and seasonal cheer is that these factories produce fighter-jet engines for a wealthy and voracious customer: China. After years of trying, Chinese engineers still can't make a reliable engine for a military plane.

The country's demands for weapons systems go much further. Chinese officials last month told Russian Defense Minister Anatoly E. Serdyukov that they may resume buying major Russian weapons systems after a several-year break. On their wish list are the Su-35 fighter, for a planned Chinese aircraft carrier; IL-476 military transport planes; IL-478 air refueling tankers and the S-400 air defense system, according to Russian news reports and weapons experts.

This persistent dependence on Russian arms suppliers demonstrates a central truth about the Chinese military: The bluster about the emergence of a superpower is undermined by national defense industries that can't produce what China needs. Although the United States is making changes in response to China's growing military power, experts and officials believe it will be years, if not decades, before China will be able to produce a much-feared ballistic missile capable of striking a warship or overcome weaknesses that keep it from projecting power far from its shores.

"They've made remarkable progress in the development of their arms industry, but this progress shouldn't be overstated," said Vasily Kashin, a Beijing-based expert on China's defense industry. "They have a long tradition of overestimating their capabilities."

Ruslan Pukhov, the director of the Center for Analysis of Strategic Technologies and an adviser to Russia's ministry of defense, predicted that China would need a decade to perfect a jet engine, among other key weapons technologies. "China is still dependent on us and will stay that way for some time to come," he said.

Indeed, China has ordered scores of engines from the Salyut and Chernyshev factories for three of its new fighters - the J11B, a Chinese knock-off of the Russian Su-27; the J10, which China is believed to have developed with Israeli help; and the FC1, which China modeled on an aborted Soviet design. It also told Russia that it wants a third engine from another factory for the Su-35.

How China's military is modernizing is important for the United States and the world. Apart from the conflict with radical Islamism, the United States views China's growing military strength as the most serious potential threat to U.S. interests around the world.
Speaking in 2009, Liang Guanglie, China's minister of defense, laid out a hugely ambitious plan to modernize the People's Liberation Army, committing China to forging a navy that would push past the islands that ring China's coasts, an air force capable of "a combination of offensive and defensive operations," and rocket forces of both "nuclear and conventional striking power."

The Pentagon, in a report to Congress this year, said that that the pace and scale of China's military reform "are broad and sweeping." But, the report noted, "the PLA remains untested in modern combat," thus making transformation difficult to assess.

'Could be sitting ducks'

One area in which China is thought to have made the greatest advances is in its submarines, part of what is now the largest fleet of naval vessels in Asia. In October 2006, a Chinese Song-class diesel-powered attack submarine reportedly shadowed the USS Kitty Hawk aircraft carrier and surfaced undetected four miles from the ship. Although the Pentagon never confirmed the report, it sparked concern that China could threaten the carriers that are at the heart of the U.S. Navy's ability to project power.

China tried to buy Russian nuclear submarines but was rebuffed, so it launched a program to make its own. Over the past two years, it has deployed at least one of a new type of nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarine called the Jin class and it may deploy as many as five more.The Office of Naval Intelligence said the Jin gives China's navy its first credible second-strike nuclear capability; its missiles have a range of 4,000 miles. But in a report last year, the ONI also noted that the Jin is noisier than nuclear submarines built by the Soviets 30 years ago, leading experts to conclude that it would be detected as soon as it left port.

"There's a tendency to talk about China as a great new military threat that's coming," said Hans M. Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists. But, when it comes to Chinese submarines carrying ballistic missiles, he said, "they could be sitting ducks."

Another problem is that China's submariners don't train very much.

China's entire fleet of 63 subs conducted only a dozen patrols in 2009, according to U.S. Navy data Kristensen obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, about a tenth of the U.S. Navy's pace. In addition, Kristensen said there is no record of a Chinese ballistic-missile sub going out on patrol. "You learn how to use your systems on patrol," he said. "If you don't patrol, how can you fight?"

Anti-ship capabilities

China's missile technology has always been the pointy edge of its spear, ever since Qian Xuesen, the gifted rocket scientist who was kicked out of the United States during the McCarthy period in the 1950s, returned to China.

U.S. government scientists have been impressed by China's capabilities. On Jan. 11, 2007, a Chinese missile traveling at more than four miles a second hit a satellite that was basically a box with three-foot sides, one U.S. government weapons expert said. Over the past several years, China has put into orbit 11 of what are believed to be its first military-only satellites, called Yaogan, which could provide China with the ability to track targets for its rockets.

China is also trying to fashion an anti-ship ballistic missile by taking a short-range rocket, the DF-21, and turning it into what could become an aircraft-carrier killing weapon.

Even though it has yet to be deployed, the system has already sparked changes in the United States. In September, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said China's "investments in anti-ship weaponry and ballistic missiles could threaten America's primary way to project power and help allies in the Pacific - particularly our forward bases and carrier strike groups." The U.S. Navy in 2008 cut the DDG-1000 destroyer program from eight ships to three because the vessels lack a missile-defense capability.

But the challenge for China is that an anti-ship ballistic missile is extremely hard to make. The Russians worked on one for decades and failed. The United States never tried, preferring to rely on cruise missiles and attack submarines to do the job of threatening an opposing navy.
U.S. satellites would detect an ASBM as soon as it was launched, providing a carrier enough warning to move several miles before the missile could reach its target. To hit a moving carrier, a U.S. government weapons specialist said, China's targeting systems would have to be "better than world-class."

Wu Riqiang, who worked for six years at the China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation as a missile designer, said that while he could not confirm that such a missile existed, he believed weapons such as these were essentially "political chips," the mere mention of which had already achieved the goal of making U.S. warships think twice about operating near China's shores.

"It's an open question how these missiles will do in a conflict situation," said Wu, who is now studying in the United States. "But the threat - that's what's most important about them."

Morale trouble

The deployment of a naval task force to the Gulf of Aden last year as part of the international operation against pirates was seen as a huge step forward for China. The implication was that China's military doctrine had shifted from defending China's borders to protecting China's interests, which span the globe. But the expeditionary force has also provided a window into weaknesses of the People's Liberation Army, according to a new report by Christopher Yung, a former Pentagon official now at the National Defense University.

China's lack of foreign military bases - it has insisted that it won't station troops abroad - limits its capacity to maintain its ships on long-term missions. A shortage of helicopters - the workhorses of a naval expeditionary force - makes it hard for the ships to operate with one another. China's tiny fleet of replenishment ships - it has only three - doesn't give it enough capacity to do more than one such operation at a time.

China's navy, according to Yung, also has difficulty maintaining a fresh water supply for its sailors. And poor refrigeration on its ships makes it hard to preserve fruit and vegetables, something that makes for griping on board.

"The sailors during the first deployment had a real morale problem," Yung said, adding that following their mission, they were taken on a beach vacation "to get morale back up."

Empowering local commanders, considered key to a successful fighting force, is something that Beijing clearly has yet to embrace. British Royal Navy Commodore Tim Lowe, who commanded the Gulf of Aden operation for the U.S. 5th Fleet up until May, noted that while other navies would send operations officers to multinational meetings to discuss how to fight pirates, China would dispatch a political officer who often lacked expertise. The concept of sharing intelligence among partner countries was also tough for the Chinese to fathom. To the Chinese, he said, "that was an unusual point."

Tension with the Kremlin

China's military relations with Russia reveal further weaknesses. Between 1992 and 2006, the total value of Russia's arms exports to China was $26 billion - almost half of all the weapons Russia sold abroad.

But tensions arose in 2004 over two issues, Russian experts said. Russia was outraged when it discovered that China, which had licensed to produce the Su-27 fighter jet from Russian kits, had actually copied the plane. China was furious that after it signed a contract for a batch of IL-76 military transport planes it discovered that Russia had no way to make them. After receiving 105 out of a contracted 200 Su-27s, China canceled the deal and weapons negotiations were not held for several years.

Purchases of some items continued - S-300 air defense systems and billions of dollars worth of jet engines. An engine China made for its Su-27 knock-off would routinely conk out after 30 hours whereas the Russian engines would need refurbishing after 400, Russian and Chinese experts said.

"Engine systems are the heart disease of our whole military industry," a Chinese defense publication quoted Wang Tianmin, a military engine designer, as saying in its March issue. "From aircraft production to shipbuilding and the armored vehicles industry, there are no exceptions."

When weapons talks resumed with Russia in 2008, China found the Russians were driving a harder bargain. For one, it wasn't offering to let China produce Russian fighters in China. And in November, the Russians said they would only provide the Su-35 for China's aircraft carrier program if China bought 48 - enough to ensure Russian firms a handsome profit before China's engineers attempted to copy the technology. Russia also announced that the Russian military would buy the S-400 air defense system first and that China could get in line.

"We, too, have learned a few things," said Vladimir Portyakov, a former Russian diplomat twice posted to Beijing.
Military strength eludes China, which looks overseas for arms


----------



## pzkilo

aimarraul said:


> take it easy,man......he was only providing a suggestion



Ok,get it


----------



## conworldus

pak fa said:


> Military strength eludes China, which looks overseas for arms
> MOSCOW - The Moscow Machine-Building Enterprise Salyut on the east side of town has put up a massive Soviet-style poster advertising its need for skilled workers. The New Year's party at the Chernyshev plant in a northwest suburb featured ballet dancers twirling on the stage of its Soviet-era Palace of Culture.
> 
> The reason for the economic and seasonal cheer is that these factories produce fighter-jet engines for a wealthy and voracious customer: China. *After years of trying, Chinese engineers still can't make a reliable engine for a military plane*.
> 
> The country's demands for weapons systems go much further. Chinese officials last month told Russian Defense Minister Anatoly E. Serdyukov that they may resume buying major Russian weapons systems after a several-year break.* On their wish list are the Su-35 fighter, for a planned Chinese aircraft carrier*; IL-476 military transport planes; IL-478 air refueling tankers and the S-400 air defense system, according to Russian news reports and weapons experts.




The above statements are false.
1. WS10A is reliable. It is just that it still has room to improve, but already good enough for deployment.
2. Su-33 is for carriers, not Su-35. China is interested in neighter.

Russians need to berate China in order to sell their stuff. It is marketing propaganda.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PRACTICAL PATRIOT

Mani2020 said:


> Su-35 is not competing in MMRCA deal



oops my bad i mean move by russia to push mig 35 in mmrca


----------



## siegecrossbow

aimarraul said:


> take it easy,man......he was only providing a suggestion



If you don't mind I'm gonna steal your profile picture   .


----------



## mnd

Not sure how reliable is this...


"According to Kanwa, citing an unnamed military source in Moscow, at least one party of the Russian Air Force ordered 48 Su-35 will be posted on the 6,968 th air base in Komsomolsk-on-Amur, which is located just 300 km from the Russian-Chinese border. According to sources, the Russian Air Force will get the first Su-35 in 2012, the Su-35 will be the most sophisticated fighter 4 + + generation. Russian Air Force has not yet been reported officially, in which parts will the Su-35 deployed

Kanwa previously reported that the Russian Air Force two regiments (23rd, located at 6987 th Air Base in Dzemgi, and 22 th in 6989 Airbase Corner) equipped with Su-27SM. These bases are located at 308 and 61 km from the Chinese border. Thus, all the Su-27SM, and the first batch of Su-35 will be located in the Eastern Military District, which is adjacent to the PRC.

The source said, "Frankly speaking, the Chinese Air Force, as well as the armed forces of the PRC in general, have become the most powerful among Russia's neighbors. Between NATO and Russia have a natural buffer area in the face of Ukraine and Belarus, and thus for the Air Force naturally looks special attention to the Far East. Moreover, the Su-27SM and Su-35 are also produced in the Far East, such as their location in the region simplifies maintenance and testing, which is also one of the most important factors. "

Following the deployment of the Su-35 in the Far East, the technology gap between Russian and Chinese air force will be increased, and the Russian Air Force, with the help of Su-35 is again able to seize air supremacy. 

Radar Irbis installed on the Su-35 can detect targets at ranges of 400 km, and, acting on the Russian territory, covering the provinces of Heilongjiang and Jilin, as well as part of Liaoning Province. 

In Soviet times, airfields tactical aircraft and strategic bombers were located near the Sino-Soviet border. For example, the base Ukrainka strategic bombers Tu-95 was only 105 km from the border. Since the 1990's. Chinese army has begun to rearm in the 12-barrel multiple rocket system type AR02 03 caliber 300 mm and a firing range of 150 km, and missiles, surface-to-earth »DF11A, which represents a significant threat to the Russian air base."

Ðîññèÿ ïëàíèðóåò ðàçâåðíóòü Ñó-35 íà Äàëüíåì Âîñòîêå - ÂÏÊ.name


----------



## Pakchina

Since when China is an enemy of Russia. The latter is supplying military equipment to China since the 1070's. Of course now China is no more procuring Russian equipment due to the following reasons:
-Chinese military equipment has surpassed Russian weapons 
-Russia's technology is outdated
-Russia can no more mass produce heavy military hardware and moreover lack of reliability, service etc while China is a bigger economy and its industrial and technological capacities have long surpassed Russia's own capacities. Russia is dependent on natural resources for its survival.
Russia is in cooperation with China in the SCO in view of not only to combat terrorism but also as a counter-balance to the influence of NATO in Asia. Besides the SU 35 is still a prototype given that Russia has no more the industrial capacity to mass produce and service such aircraft. There is no proof that the SU 35 is a technological 4.5 generation aircraft. Only speculation, rumours and gossip.


----------



## Paan Singh

Pakchina said:


> Since when China is an enemy of Russia. The latter is supplying military equipment to China since the 1070's. Of course now China is no more procuring Russian equipment due to the following reasons:
> -Chinese military equipment has surpassed Russian weapons
> -Russia's technology is outdated
> -Russia can no more mass produce heavy military hardware and moreover lack of reliability, service etc while China is a bigger economy and its industrial and technological capacities have long surpassed Russia's own capacities. Russia is dependent on natural resources for its survival.
> Russia is in cooperation with China in the SCO in view of not only to combat terrorism but also as a counter-balance to the influence of NATO in Asia. Besides the SU 35 is still a prototype given that Russia has no more the industrial capacity to mass produce and service such aircraft. There is no proof that the SU 35 is a technological 4.5 generation aircraft. Only speculation, rumours and gossip.


 
yes,firstly u copy n take their tech,,,then criticize their techh


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Prism said:


> yes,firstly u copy n take their tech,,,then criticize their techh


 
Are you Indian or Pakistani? You keep changing your flags

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Adnan Faruqi

First of all its not confirmed yet, still its today or tomorrow Russia have to be very vigil about China's bullying of Its neighbors.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Adnan Faruqi said:


> First of all its not confirmed yet, still its today or tomorrow Russia have to be very vigil about China's bullying of Its neighbors.


 
Poor Russia. Why do we bully them so

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Paan Singh

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Are you Indian or Pakistani? You keep changing your flags


 
hi tenali,u forgot me


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Prism said:


> hi tenali,u forgot me


 
My memory isn't that bad. You had all Pakistani flags yesterday.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## REEVER

If your tech is so good why hack a pentagon network to see f 35 blueprint to help with j20

If the tech is so amazing why make the j 11 a blatant copy if the sukhoi

If your tech is so good why use us tech in the form of isreali Protoype to build the j 10

Why is your ws-10 a rip off GE engine 



Why?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Ammyy

Pakchina said:


> Besides the SU 35 is still a prototype given that Russia has no more the industrial capacity to mass produce and service such aircraft.



that industry is origin of all Chinese planes even JF17 of PAF using their engine 



> There is no proof that the SU 35 is a technological 4.5 generation aircraft. *Only speculation, rumours and gossip.*


 
If SU35 is a prototype than that what about J10b, J11bs ???


----------



## AvidSpice

Prism said:


> hi tenali,u forgot me


 
Pakistanis bombed you back to India I guess! Who will you work for now?


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Prism said:


> hi tenali,u forgot me


 
LOL his name is not "tenali" it is Tan Lixiang.



tanlixiang28776 said:


> My memory isn't that bad. You had all Pakistani flags yesterday.


 
Prism is definitely Indian.

I think he just changed his flags as some sort of practical joke.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Paan Singh

tanlixiang28776 said:


> My memory isn't that bad. You had all Pakistani flags yesterday.


 







i was first to post tenali pic.......ur memory is weak,take some dry fruits


----------



## Paan Singh

Avishekh said:


> Pakistanis bombed you back to India I guess! Who will you work for now?


 
i was invited by zordari for jana bday,...i was in pakistan yesterday...


----------



## AvidSpice

Prism said:


> i was invited by zordari for jana bday,...i was in pakistan yesterday...


 
Zordari ka jhatka Zor se laga!


----------



## mautkimaut

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Are you Indian or Pakistani? You keep changing your flags


 
HE is indian, yesterday was Jana's birthday so he was trying some joke on her ...


----------



## SpArK

I thought Russia had issues with just *Japan*.


----------



## SpArK

*Anyway its an incredible machine
*


----------



## Ammyy

SpArK said:


> *Anyway its an incredible machine
> *


 
our new MKIs (42) will get lot of features of this beauty ????

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Paan Singh

how many passengers can sit in su-35.....???toilet facilities,internet facilities????


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

This has nothing to do with China, but it may be the beginning of the Russian civil war. Putin vs Medvedev

Everything point out to the election of 2012, both are fighting to gain more power. If Putin loses the election, no doubt he would have started a military coup. So Meddy needs to make sure that his loyals having enough power to prevent this to happen.


----------



## my name is arya

su35 is one of the best planes 

i wish we can take some in place of su30 mki 

can some one compare su30mki and su35


----------



## iPakMan

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> This has nothing to do with China, but it may be the beginning of the Russian civil war. Putin vs Medvedev
> 
> Everything point out to the election of 2012, both are fighting to gain more power. If Putin loses the election, no doubt he would have started a military coup. So Meddy needs to make sure that his loyals having enough power to prevent this to happen.


 
What are you talking about? Medvedev was handpicked by Putin to become president...


----------



## jha

SpArK said:


> *Anyway its an incredible machine
> *



What a beauty..Always wanted to have a mix of MKI and Su-35 instead of this MRCA drama..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

iPakMan said:


> What are you talking about? Medvedev was handpicked by Putin to become president...


 
Yeah, but this is the past, nobody wants to be a puppet when you have enough power by yourself.

It is very obvious they are now both hungry for power.


----------



## jha

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> This has nothing to do with China, but it may be the beginning of the Russian civil war. Putin vs Medvedev
> 
> Everything point out to the election of 2012, both are fighting to gain more power. If Putin loses the election, no doubt he would have started a military coup. So Meddy needs to make sure that his loyals having enough power to prevent this to happen.


 
hahahaha..excellent analysis...
Russians are really clever...


----------



## iPakMan

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Yeah, this is the past, but nobody wants to be a puppet when you have enough power by yourself.
> 
> It is very obvious they are now both hungry for power.


 
Everyone knows Putin is in charge, even if Medvedev has delusions about staying in power, they will be squashed very quickly.


----------



## my name is arya

Prism said:


> how many passengers can sit in su-35.....???toilet facilities,internet facilities????


 
well two is company 3 is crowd you and me gr8 u and me in su35 

i like your avatar


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

iPakMan said:


> Everyone knows Putin is in charge, even if Medvedev has delusions about staying in power, they will be squashed very quickly.


 
Putin will definitely squash Medvedev if push comes to shove.

What interests me is that Putin and Medvedev often clash over foreign policy, even though Putin is nominally in charge.

Medvedev is often very friendly towards the West, while Putin is not.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

iPakMan said:


> Everyone knows Putin is in charge, even if Medvedev has delusions about staying in power, they will be squashed very quickly.


 
Meddy starts to focus on Siberia and Far East, i presume he is the one in charge of these two military districts.

The Borei class SSBNs were moved to the Pacific fleet and more advanced aircrafts were also moved to the Russian Far East.

Now the military power between European Russia and Asian Russia isn't that much unbalanced like before.

No doubt Putin is still in charge of the most powerful part in Russia, but Meddy has significantly gained his support from elsewhere, so now the military coup wouldn't be easy for Putin.


----------



## blackops

i so wanted to su 35 in our airforce with ram coatings and best features to be added from all around the world


----------



## SpArK

*The Advantage*


----------



## Roybot

REEVER said:


> If your tech is so good why hack a pentagon network to see f 35 blueprint to help with j20
> 
> If the tech is so amazing why make the j 11 a blatant copy if the sukhoi
> 
> If your tech is so good why use us tech in the form of isreali Protoype to build the j 10
> 
> Why is your ws-10 a rip off GE engine
> 
> 
> 
> Why?


----------



## Bigoren

REEVER said:


> If your tech is so good why hack a pentagon network to see f 35 blueprint to help with j20
> 
> If the tech is so amazing why make the j 11 a blatant copy if the sukhoi
> 
> If your tech is so good why use us tech in the form of isreali Protoype to build the j 10
> 
> Why is your ws-10 a rip off GE engine
> 
> 
> 
> Why?


 
Pentagon got hacked??Wow,its a proud achivement if anyone success to hack your pentogon network.Isnt it?


----------



## Adnan Faruqi

SpArK said:


> I thought Russia had issues with just *Japan*.


 
Zamboanga Today Online, the most read newspaper in Zamboanga City | China accuses PH of

Vietnam and China pledge to settle South China Sea disputes - Monsters and Critics

China Mongolia Border Clashes 1947-1948

Tajikistan gives China land to settle century-old dispute

Not to forget Japan, India and pakistan have happily given disputed kashmir's major part to China.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Adnan Faruqi said:


> Zamboanga Today Online, the most read newspaper in Zamboanga City | China accuses PH of
> 
> Vietnam and China pledge to settle South China Sea disputes - Monsters and Critics
> 
> China Mongolia Border Clashes 1947-1948
> 
> Tajikistan gives China land to settle century-old dispute
> 
> Not to forget Japan, India and pakistan have happily given disputed kashmir's major part to China.


 
You mean like how India has problems with China, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangaldesh, etc.?

Almost 100% of your land borders are with countries that you have a problem with.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ammyy

Chinese-Dragon said:


> You mean like how India has problems with China, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangaldesh, etc.?


 
Yes we have problem with Pakistan and China this is sensible 
but with Bangladesh and Srilanks ?? Ohh sorry i forget on PDF both are enemies of India


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

DRDO said:


> Yes we have problem with Pakistan and China this is sensible
> but with Bangladesh and Srilanks ?? Ohh sorry i forget on PDF both are enemies of India


 
What about India's support of LTTE in Sri Lanka? Or the border killings with Bangladesh?

Here is a list of countries that have a land border with China:

Russia 
Pakistan 
Tajikistan
Afghanistan
Bhutan
Burma
India 
Kazakhstan 
North Korea
Kyrgyzstan
Vietnam
Laos
Mongolia 
Nepal

Compare it with India's land neighbours. And tell your friend to stop throwing stones in a glass house.


----------



## Splurgenxs

> You mean like how India has problems with China, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangaldesh, etc.?
> 
> Almost 100% of your land borders are with countries that you have a problem with.


Srry not true....Insecure ? cus u do seem so.



> What about India's support of LTTE in Sri Lanka? Or the border killings with Bangladesh?


*Sigh* ....as stated countless times The LTTE killed Rajive Gandhi for his positioning against LTTE...where do u come up with this stuff? Id love to see some proof

The border killing in BD are protocol im guessing u kno what tht means? and the Killing only happed at night when they try to sneak in. The BSF is not the police it does what has to be done...period.

Get out of ur denial bubble


----------



## Ammyy

Chinese-Dragon said:


> What about India's support of LTTE in Sri Lanka? Or the border killings with Bangladesh?
> 
> 
> Compare it with India's land neighbours. And tell your friend to stop throwing stones in a glass house.


 
Dnt live in PDF world cause reality is different and can embarrass you 

Bangladesh to honour 226 Indians for role in 1971 'Liberation War' - Times Of India
India's views matter, don't care about the world: Rajapaksa - Times Of India
India's help during LTTE war reduced world pressure: Sri Lanka


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

DRDO said:


> Dnt live in PDF world cause reality is different and can embarrass you



Tell it to your Indian friend who started flaming by posting all those links. 

The point is, that out of ALL China's land neighbours, we only have a land border dispute with one of them. India.


----------



## Splurgenxs

> Tell it to your Indian friend who started flaming by posting all those links.
> 
> The point is, that out of all China's land neighbors, we only have a land border dispute with one of them. India.
> 
> That is 1 out of 14. India has land disputes with 2 out of 7.


What aww no Really?...u mean Japan , Philippines, Vietnam are ur Best of Pals?


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Splurgenxs said:


> What aww no Really?...u mean Japan , Philippines, Vietnam are ur Best of Pals?


 
China is the biggest trading partner of all those countries.  And there is no open conflict with any country.

India on the other hand is still fighting militants and insurgents, and has been having military conflict with its neighbours up till recent times. Even up till 2008 with the Mumbai attacks.

You guys are getting smacked by everyone around you, and you're pointing fingers at China? &#20116;&#21313;&#27493;&#31505;&#30334;&#27493;&#12290;

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ammyy

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Tell it to your Indian friend who started flaming by posting all those links.
> 
> The point is, that out of all China's land neighbours, we only have a land border dispute with one of them. India.
> 
> That is 1 out of 14. India has land disputes with 2 out of 7.


 
I thought both Russia,Japan and China claiming same island


----------



## tanlixiang28776

DRDO said:


> I thought both Russia,Japan and China claiming same island


 
No. 

Russia and Japan have disputes over some islands.

China and Japan have disputes over a different set of islands.


----------



## below_freezing

No, Russia and Japan have a conflict separate from the China Japan conflict.


----------



## Ammyy

Chinese-Dragon said:


> China is the biggest trading partner of all those countries.  And there is no open conflict with any country.
> 
> India on the other hand is still fighting militants and insurgents, and has been having military conflict with its neighbours up till recent times. Even up till 2008 with the Mumbai attacks.
> 
> *You guys are getting smacked by everyone around you, and you're pointing fingers at China?*


 
who the hell except Pakistan and China you talking about ????


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

DRDO said:


> who the hell except Pakistan and China you talking about ????


 
You're still on open conflict with Pakistan and have a severe border problem with China.

China and Pakistan together, make up the vast majority of India's land borders. That's what you call backing yourself into a corner.


----------



## Abhishek_

Chinese-Dragon said:


> You're still on open conflict with Pakistan and have a severe border problem with China.
> 
> China and Pakistan together, make up the vast majority of India's land borders. *That's what you call backing yourself into a corner.*


 
said the country with north korea and pakistan as the only real allies


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Abhishek_ said:


> said the country with north korea and pakistan as the only real allies


 
Said the country with no one as its real ally. 

Russia is already with China, both are founding members of the SCO.

We have strong diplomatic and trading relationships with the EU, with the USA, with Japan, with East Asia. We have strong diplomatic ties to most of the countries in South Asia (except India), Central Asia, the Middle East, South America, and Africa.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Abhishek_ said:


> said the country with north korea and pakistan as the only real allies


 
Have we ever counted on them for a war? We're not Indians thinking that both America and Russia will come save us when war starts.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Abhishek_

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Said the country with no one as it's close ally.
> 
> Russia is already with China, both as founding members of the SCO.


 
whatever helps you sleep better mate


----------



## Splurgenxs

> China is the biggest trading partner of all those countries. And there is no open conflict with any country.
> 
> India on the other hand is still fighting militants and insurgents, and has been having military conflict with its neighbors up till recent times.


And India dosent? Materialistic connections are a weak cover-up..I can be broken and remade in a snap.
Oh the Japanese Shinkaku island incedent ,and now with Philipens do u call it History? hmmm

Its funny how Chinese love to down play and over-exaggerate at the same time.



> Have we ever counted on them for a war? We're not Indians thinking that both America and Russia will come save us when war starts.



Aah alas delusion runs rampant with a few Chinese. And name one event when India asked for assistance?lol'

When Facts don't suffice .....on with the trolling lol


----------



## Abhishek_

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Have we ever counted on them for a war? We're not Indians thinking that both America and Russia will come save us when war starts.


 
indians dont rely on other coutnries in times of war, its your all weather friend that does it


----------



## Peshwa

Chinese-Dragon said:


> You mean like how India has problems with China, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangaldesh, etc.?



Takes 2 to clap....Why is India to blame?




> Almost 100% of your land borders are with countries that you have a problem with.


 
Whats your point? Its only natural that disputes happen over a converging interests....In most cases, this is with neighbors....

Isnt that the case with China as well(USA doesnt count)?


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Splurgenxs said:


> And India dosent? Materialistic connections are a weak cover-up..I can be broken and remade in a snap.
> Oh the Japanese Shinkaku island incedent ,and now with Philipens do u call it History? hmmm
> 
> Its funny how Chinese love to down play and over-exaggerate at the same time.


 
You're not even close to being one of their largest trading partners. Japan is also having island disputes with Russia. Are you supporting them on that as well?

Its funny how you Indians think Japan cares about India when they are having disputes.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Have we ever counted on them for a war? We're not Indians thinking that both America and Russia will come save us when war starts.


 
And being dissapointed, when America/Russia etc. were in fact telling them not to respond to the Mumbai attacks.


----------



## Ammyy

Chinese-Dragon said:


> You're still on open conflict with Pakistan and have a severe border problem with China.
> 
> China and Pakistan together, make up the vast majority of India's land borders.* That's what you call backing yourself into a corner.*


 
USA sitting on your head in south China sea with three of your neighbors (Japan, Taiwan, NK)
Philippines, Vietnam already their 
Land dispute with India

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Abhishek_

tan, India is pragmatic enough to continue trading and developing its economy while maintaining a peaceful border. there are certain members on both sides here that enjoy making hills out of mounds.
GOI and CPC are sane enough not to engage in hostilities.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Peshwa said:


> Isnt that the case with China as well(USA doesnt count)?


 
USA and China have the biggest bilateral economic relationship in the world. With people even talking about a "G2".

We work together on a lot of diplomatic and strategic issues. Both sides know that they can't fight each other directly, so why not work together.

One interesting commonality: America is the biggest source of external funding for the Pakistani Army, while China is the biggest supplier and supporter of the Pakistani Army.


----------



## Varad

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Have we ever counted on them for a war? *We're not Indians thinking that both America and Russia will come save us when war starts*.


 
And we are not Chinese who needed all the support in the world to save themselves from Japan in their very own land.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> And we are not Chinese who needed all the support in the world to save themselves from Japan in their very own land.


 
America certainly didn't care about China when they started invading Japan. It was in their own interests. As for India you didn't even fight for your own country. Britain let you go because they were too busy getting pwned by Germany.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Peshwa

Chinese-Dragon said:


> What about India's support of LTTE in Sri Lanka? Or the border killings with Bangladesh?.


 
LTTE was finished with India's blessing....
So what bad blood are you speaking of?

And regarding BD....If illegal immigrants stopped tresspassing, there would be no need to....

Nevetheless....How has this affected our relationship with these countries?
A dispute is only worth talking about if it affects bilateral relationship....as is the case with Pakistan.....

So I dont see what point youre trying to prove here...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Varad

Chinese-Dragon said:


> USA and China have the biggest bilateral economic relationship in the world. With people even talking about a "G2".
> 
> *We work together on a lot of diplomatic and strategic issues. Both sides know that they can't fight each other directly, so why not work together.
> *
> One interesting commonality: America is the biggest source of external funding for the Pakistani Army, while China is the biggest supplier and supporter of the Pakistani Army.


 
Use it to throw USA out of Asia.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Varad said:


> And we are not Chinese who needed all the support in the world to save themselves from Japan in their very own land.


 
The Japanese forces were almost entirely pushed out of mainland China before America even dropped the nukes. 

True, we lost a lot, due to the corrupt Qing dynasty and the devastating Chinese Civil War. Which gave Japan the perfect opportunity.

However, they were not successful. China is the one sitting on the UN Security Council with a veto, not Japan.

Japan has been left with a "pacifist constitution" which prevents them from even making the "threat" of force against anyone.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> Use it to throw USA out of Asia.


 
What are you talking about?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Peshwa said:


> So I dont see what point youre trying to prove here...


 
Ask your Indian friend what point he was trying to prove, I was simply responding to him.


----------



## Varad

tanlixiang28776 said:


> America certainly didn't care about China when they started invading Japan. It was in their own interests. As for India you didn't even fight for your own country. Britain let you go because they were too busy getting pwned by Germany.
> 
> ---------- Post added at 12:04 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:03 AM ----------
> 
> 
> 
> America certainly didn't care about China when they started invading Japan. It was in their own interests. As for India you didn't even fight for your own country. Britain let you go because they were too busy getting pwned by Germany.


 
Your logic is not going to change history. The fact still remains the same. You accused us on relying on others i just counter replied brother.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Varad said:


> Use it to throw USA out of Asia.


 
Why should we do that, when the current status quo is favouring us so much?

America can assume the costs of being the "world policeman" (and keeping the global status quo), while we benefit from it, without having to spend much ourselves.


----------



## Peshwa

Chinese-Dragon said:


> The point is, that out of ALL China's land neighbours, we only have a land border dispute with one of them. India.


 
So...maybe China should drop its claim over Indian lands and there wouldnt be a dispute now would there?

And being that its China thats claiming that India is "occupying" their land, its not India who started the dispute here...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abhishek_

the east asian countries who are forming new alliances to resist the chinese rise even to the point to allying with US goes to show the kind of relationship china has with its neighbors.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Varad

tanlixiang28776 said:


> What are you talking about?


 
You said you have strategic interests with them, yet there are major clashes on Taiwan, South China Sea etc etc. So i said use that diplomacy and try to move them out of here.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> Your logic is not going to change history. The fact still remains the same. You accused us on relying on others i just counter replied brother.


 
Not the same at all. India asking for help only benefits India as you would have been at war by yourself. America and China were both at war with Japan, and benefited both.


----------



## Abhishek_

Peshwa said:


> So...maybe China should drop its claim over Indian lands and there wouldnt be a dispute now would there?
> 
> And being that its China thats claiming that India is "occupying" their land, its not India who started the dispute here...


 
c'mon dude, don't you know it was chinese territory when dinosaurs ruled the earth

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> You said you have strategic interests with them, yet there are major clashes on Taiwan, South China Sea etc etc. So i said use that diplomacy and try to move them out of here.


 
Clashes that are diplomatic and are mostly hot air. We haven't actually fought America directly since Korea.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Varad said:


> And we are not Chinese who needed all the support in the world to save themselves from Japan in their very own land.


 
India was "gifted" their country at the behest of Britain.

India never fought for it, in fact India did not even exist before Britain united the princely states.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## madooxno9

> -Chinese military equipment has surpassed Russian weapons
> -Russia's technology is outdated









 to EARTH....


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Peshwa said:


> And being that its China thats claiming that India is "occupying" their land, *its not India who started the dispute here...*


 
Actually you did, when you backstabbed us in 1959 by hosting our largest separatist group.

Before that, there were no serious issues in the China-India relationship.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Abhishek_ said:


> c'mon dude, don't you know it was chinese territory when dinosaurs ruled the earth


 
Disputes are won by those that have diplomatic, historical, and military superiority.

None of which you possessed back then, or even now.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Peshwa

Chinese-Dragon said:


> China is the biggest trading partner of all those countries.  And there is no open conflict with any country



Right...but does that change the nature of the dispute?



> India on the other hand is still fighting militants and insurgents, and has been having military conflict with its neighbours up till recent times. Even up till 2008 with the Mumbai attacks.



So now you're going to blame the Mumbai attacks as being an act of aggression on our part and not retaliation? Almost like we brought this upon ourselves?

wonderful logic....what lenghths you are going to, to prove a point that doesnt make sense... 



> You guys are getting smacked by everyone around you, and you're pointing fingers at China? &#20116;&#21313;&#27493;&#31505;&#30334;&#27493;&#12290;



Pipe down the aggressive rhetoric...Its getting a bit childish now

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tanlixiang28776

madooxno9 said:


> to EARTH....


 
About as funny as your Chief scientists claiming that India has superior ballistic missile technology compared to China.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Disputes are won by those that have diplomatic, historical, and military superiority.
> 
> *None of which you possessed back then, or even now.*


 
Very true. They are actually still fighting against so-called "cross-border attacks".


----------



## Varad

Chinese-Dragon said:


> India was "gifted" their country at the behest of Britain.
> 
> India never fought for it, in fact India did not even exist before Britain united the princely states.



You mean gifted as China which if it was not for the west would have the name of Japan written all over it by now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abhishek_

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Disputes are won by those that have diplomatic, historical, and military superiority.
> 
> None of which you possessed back then, or even now.


 
well then i guess we have enough to hold south tibet and to have broken your all weather friend in half (where were you btw when that happened, such friend you are ehh?)


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Peshwa said:


> Pipe down the aggressive rhetoric...Its getting a bit childish now


 
Wow you're calling other people childish, when it's *you *who is resorting to personal attacks? (As shown above).

Quite hypocritical of you.


----------



## Bigoren

Varad said:


> And we are not Chinese who needed all the support in the world to save themselves from Japan in their very own land.


 
At least the chinese didnt lost their whole country land like the indian did to the britain.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## madooxno9

> India never fought for it, in fact India did not even exist before Britain united the princely states.



you HAVE no idea....what you are writing ....never write this again....you are just making fun of your knowledge.....lol






^^^^ BHARAT , one more name of India....if you do not know....in 300 B.C.






^^^ India unde rAshoka.....265 B.C.

chandragupt was a slave ...who became king under guidance and training of chanakya , whose dream was to join whole Bharat(India) again.... under one king......


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Varad said:


> You mean gifted as China which if it was not for the west would have the name of Japan written all over it by now.


 
Wrong. Like I said, Japan attacked China a full 10 years before anyone else in the world joined in.

And they had already been almost completely pushed out of China, before America dropped the bombs.

And for your information, Japanese have always written with Han characters. They even call it "Kanji", which literally means Han characters.


----------



## Paan Singh

tanlixiang28776 said:


> America certainly didn't care about China when they started invading Japan. It was in their own interests. As for India you didn't even fight for your own country. *Britain let you go because they were too busy getting pwned by Germany*.


 
poor tenali thinking.........

do search abt some indian history b4 writing...i hope u r sure abt ur history...


----------



## Abhishek_

Bigoren said:


> At least the chinese didnt lost their whole country land like the indian did to the britain.


 
yes you guys just got high on opium, now bugger off


----------



## Varad

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Not the same at all. India asking for help only benefits India as you would have been at war by yourself. America and China were both at war with Japan, and benefited both.


 
Your statement contrasts your previous point,which stated we rely on other countries. Now if we are with war against China why would anyone help us, because it is not in their interests.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Abhishek_ said:


> well then i guess we have enough to hold south tibet and to have broken your all weather friend in half (where were you btw when that happened, such friend you are ehh?)


 
Pakistan is big enough to handle itself.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Bigoren said:


> At least the chinese didnt lost their whole country land like the indian did to the britain.


 
Very true.

The land that is now India was once a bunch of princely states that was united by Britain into a country called "India". They never EVER fought to free themselves of the British, the British let them go.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Paan Singh

Bigoren said:


> At least the chinese didnt lost their whole country land like the indian did to the britain.


 
there was no india b4 1947,they were different states...
do see my avatar and cool ur mind


----------



## Bigoren

Peshwa said:


> So...maybe China should drop its claim over Indian lands and there wouldnt be a dispute now would there?
> 
> And being that its China thats claiming that India is "occupying" their land, its not India who started the dispute here...


 
Maybe india should return all land that occupid by india illegally like kashmir and "aruchanal" to Pakistan and China.


----------



## Paan Singh

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Pakistan is big enough to handle itself.


 
ya sure...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Varad

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Wrong. Like I said, Japan attacked China a full 10 years before anyone else in the world joined in.
> 
> And they had already been almost completely pushed out of China, before America dropped the bombs.
> 
> And for your information, Japanese have always written with Han characters. They even call it "Kanji", which literally means Han characters.



The Japanese had to be nuked not once but twice in order to stop them that too against USA, and you say China pushed them out. Have you forgotten all about Manchuria?


----------



## Abhishek_

Bigoren said:


> Maybe india should return all land that occupid by india illegally like kashmir and "aruchanal" to Pakistan and China.


 
your fellow inmates already mentioned, you can only win a dispute when you are superior. looks like you are not.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Abhishek_ said:


> yes you guys just got high on opium, now bugger off


 
LOL, I thought you said your fiancee was Chinese?


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> The Japanese had to be nuked not once but twice in order to stop them that too against USA, and you say China pushed them out. Have you forgotten all about Manchuria?


 
And nukes were only used because America didn't feel like losing anymore soldiers. They didn't do it for China's benefit.


----------



## Bigoren

Prism said:


> there was no india b4 1947,they were different states...
> do see my avatar and cool ur mind


 
There are also no PRC before 1949 too.So according to what you said,do you think that indian before 1947 are not indian?LOL.You win.


----------



## Bigoren

Varad said:


> The Japanese had to be nuked not once but twice in order to stop them that too against USA, and you say China pushed them out. Have you forgotten all about Manchuria?


 
Tell me what about Manchuria?Semms like you are understand more?


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

tanlixiang28776 said:


> And nukes were only used because America didn't feel like losing anymore soldiers. They didn't do it for China's benefit.


 
Exactly right.

China fought and held off the Japanese. Even the Japanese themselves admitted it would be impossible to occupy all of China.

Whereas a bunch of British held the whole of India for 200 years. And India never fought them off, Britain gifted their country to them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aristocrat

Chinese-Dragon said:


> LOL, I thought you said your fiancee was Chinese?


 
I think he said taiwanese


----------



## madooxno9

> About as funny as your Chief scientists claiming that India has superior ballistic missile technology compared to China.



Atleast we are not involved intellectual property theft , at least other nation do not point at us ...when their computer get hacked and technologies taken away...at least we buy and apy , even more sometimes...but do not reverse engineer it and steal others property ...and then say that your technologies are inferior lol......

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Varad

tanlixiang28776 said:


> And nukes were only used because America didn't feel like losing anymore soldiers. They didn't do it for China's benefit.


 
quite right. but my point is they were so unrelenting and that too against USA.If it was not for western powers, they would have captured whole of China. Marching straight towards India through Myanmar.


----------



## Peshwa

tanlixiang28776 said:


> You're not even close to being one of their largest trading partners. Japan is also having island disputes with Russia. Are you supporting them on that as well?
> 
> Its funny how you Indians think Japan cares about India when they are having disputes.


 
China and USA are the largest trading partners....has that stopped USA from selling offensive weapons to Taiwan and Japan?

Has it stopped USA from taking aggressive postures towards China? So what makes you think any of these countries that trade with you will give up the sovereignty of their lands in a swap deal for more trade? Especially trade that favors China in almost all cases? You guys are delusional...

The only thing trade does is increase incentives for these countries NOT to attack you....does not mean that the dispute has been settled...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Paan Singh

Bigoren said:


> There are also no PRC before 1949 too.So according to what you said,do you think that indian before 1947 are not indian?LOL.You win.




eat dry fruits to sharp memory...
ppl used to be called through their cultures and states..like ppl of punajb as punjabi..it is still present but we r now united under name as indian and in hindi as bhartiya....

although,b4 47,ppl were already united to fight against brits..so country formation was laid there..few things were done after independence


----------



## Bigoren

Abhishek_ said:


> yes you guys just got high on opium, now bugger off


 
Yes,and you guys high with your curry,now bugger off.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aristocrat

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Very true.
> 
> The land that is now India was once a bunch of princely states that was united by Britain into a country called "India". They never EVER fought to free themselves of the British, the British let them go.


Yeah right ,like japan let u go.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

aristocrat said:


> Yeah right ,like japan let u go.


 
Japan was a loser of WW2.

Britain was one of the winners.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

madooxno9 said:


> Atleast we are not involved intellectual property theft , at least other nation do not point at us ...when their computer get hacked and technologies taken away...at least we buy and apy , even more sometimes...but do not reverse engineer it and steal others property ...and then say that your technologies are inferior lol......


 
LOL. Only reason no one sues for intellectual property theft against India is that it takes you 25 years to copy something. Germans had moved on to the Leopard 2A6 and you start deploying the copied Leopard 2A4. Oh and you still have to buy their engines.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Bigoren said:


> Yes,and you guys high with your curry,now bugger off.


 
Don't sink to his level buddy...


----------



## Bigoren

madooxno9 said:


> Atleast we are not involved intellectual property theft , at least other nation do not point at us ...when their computer get hacked and technologies taken away...at least we buy and apy , even more sometimes...but do not reverse engineer it and steal others property ...and then say that your technologies are inferior lol......


 
100% SURE? Hey anyone there,post some picture to cool his mind.He too high .


----------



## aristocrat

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Japan was a loser of WW2.
> 
> Britain was one of the winners.


 
Precisely my point.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> quite right. but my point is they were so unrelenting and that too against USA.If it was not for western powers, they would have captured whole of China. Marching straight towards India through Myanmar.


 
They tried for 10 years and all they got was Manchuria. They were no where near capturing all of China.

Reactions: Like Like:
 1


----------



## Varad

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Exactly right.
> 
> China fought and held off the Japanese. Even the Japanese themselves admitted it would be impossible to occupy all of China.
> 
> *Whereas a bunch of British* held the whole of India for 200 years. And India never fought them off, Britain gifted their country to them.




I can also say a bunch of ships from USA has held your claims on Taiwan and South China Sea and will keep it that way forever. Now dont follow our example, you guys fight.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> I can also say a bunch of ships from USA has held your claims on Taiwan and South China Sea and will keep it that way forever. Now dont follow our example, you guys fight.


 
They hold every sea in the World.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bigoren

aristocrat said:


> Yeah right ,like japan let u go.


 
Let?I know you failed bad in your history class.Go get more history class kids.


----------



## Abhishek_

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Exactly right.
> 
> China fought and held off the Japanese. Even the Japanese themselves admitted it would be impossible to occupy all of China.
> 
> Whereas a bunch of British held the whole of India for 200 years. And India never fought them off, Britain gifted their country to them.



the indian masses had both choices, they selected the non-violent movement. not every people have the nature to engage in cultural revolutions you know


----------



## Paan Singh

Bigoren said:


> Yes,and you guys high with your curry,now bugger off.


 
taste it !!!it is better than every thing u eat...


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Varad said:


> I can also say a bunch of ships from USA has held your claims on Taiwan and South China Sea and will keep it that way forever. Now dont follow our example, you guys fight.


 
No, nowadays we solve our land disputes peacefully. Like the handover of Hong Kong, or the exchange of land from Tajikistan.

You guys are still facing severe attacks from militant groups based inside of Kashmir. The Mumbai attacks themselves, almost triggered another all-out war in the subcontinent.


----------



## Varad

Bigoren said:


> At least the chinese didnt lost their whole country land like the indian did to the britain.


 
So, that makes them better.


----------



## Peshwa

Chinese-Dragon said:


> India was "gifted" their country at the behest of Britain.
> 
> India never fought for it, in fact India did not even exist before Britain united the princely states.



Because present day Indians immigrated from foreign lands to the current boundaries right?....Not like they have been living in these lands for over 5000 years...

But whatever it takes to prove a point right....

Frankly.....on this point Im going to take a stand along with communist China.....Your opinion doesnt count!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Varad

Chinese-Dragon said:


> No, nowadays we solve our land disputes peacefully. Like the handover of Hong Kong, or the exchange of land from Tajikistan.
> 
> You guys are still facing severe attacks from militant groups based inside of Kashmir.


 
We have been facing it since the time we were almost bankcrupt and will continue to face it forever. When talking of peace, do keep all countries in mind otherwise things become difficult.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Peshwa said:


> But whatever it takes to prove a point right....


 
If Indians want to laugh about Japanese war crimes, then we have the right to point out, that at least we FOUGHT for our country.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aristocrat

Bigoren said:


> Let?I know you failed bad in your history class.Go get more history class kids.


 
Tell that to ur pal cd


----------



## Bigoren

Varad said:


> So, that makes them better.


 
yeah,better.At least they fought,not like someone in south asia.You know,what I mean,but i have some impression for the Gandhi,one of the great indian .


----------



## Varad

tanlixiang28776 said:


> They tried for 10 years and all they got was Manchuria. They were no where near capturing all of China.



Yes because after 10 years the west came in, seeing their expansionist policy.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> Yes because after 10 years the west came in, seeing their expansionist policy.


 
America wasn't expansionist during WW2. They just wanted to end the war and get revenge for Pearl Harbor.


----------



## Abhishek_

Chinese-Dragon said:


> If Indians want to laugh about Japanese war crimes, then we have the right to point out, that at least we FOUGHT for our country.


 
nobody is laughing about the japanese war crimes on this thread...use your high IQ for once


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

tanlixiang28776 said:


> They tried for 10 years and all they got was Manchuria. They were no where near capturing all of China.


 
Exactly right. 

That was long before any of the allies entered the war.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aristocrat

Chinese-Dragon said:


> If Indians want to laugh about Japanese war crimes, then we have the right to point out, that we at least FOUGHT for our country.


 
We r not the ones who started undermining others freedom struggle.


----------



## Varad

Bigoren said:


> yeah,better.At least they fought,not like someone in south asia.You know,what I mean,but i have some impression for the Gandhi,one of the great indian .


 
Yet without even fighting we got victory.Did not need the west.  Fan of Gandhi me too.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

aristocrat said:


> We r not the ones who started undermining others freedom struggle.


 
You guys laugh about Japanese war crimes all the time, even in the other "PH" thread just below this one.

In this particular thread, the argument was started by an Indian poster who started posting all the negative articles regarding China. Before that there was no trolling.

Check it yourself, he is now banned.


----------



## Bigoren

tanlixiang28776 said:


> America wasn't expansionist during WW2. They just wanted to end the war and get revenge for Pearl Harbor.


 
yeah right.Japanese and the germany were the expansionist.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Bigoren said:


> yeah right.Japanese and the germany were the expansionist.


 
I figured most people would understand WW2 by now.


----------



## Abhishek_

Chinese-Dragon said:


> You guys laugh about Japanese war crimes all the time, even in the other "PH" thread just below this one.
> 
> In this particular thread, the argument was started by an Indian poster who started posting all the negative articles regarding China. Before that there was no trolling.
> 
> Check it yourself, he is now banned.


 
yes yes, chinese are perpetually innocent.
btw this lowly IQ hindu didn't understand your pm. and your pm box is full so I couldn't reply

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Varad

tanlixiang28776 said:


> America wasn't expansionist during WW2. They just wanted to end the war and get revenge for Pearl Harbor.


 
I am talking about Japan's expansion and why west came in


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> I am talking about Japan's expansion and why west came in


 
It was America and they came in because they were attacked by Japan as well. Otherwise they never would have gotten involved.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Varad

Chinese-Dragon said:


> You guys laugh about Japanese war crimes all the time, even in the other "PH" thread just below this one.
> 
> In this particular thread, the argument was started by an Indian poster who started posting all the negative articles regarding China. Before that there was no trolling.
> 
> Check it yourself, he is now banned.



In this thread i started Japan when taxliang said India need other countries to fight our wars. Expect such things when you make such statements.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Abhishek_ said:


> yes yes, chinese are perpetually innocent.
> btw this lowly IQ hindu didn't understand your pm. and your pm box is full so I couldn't reply


 
Oh right sorry, I just cleared my PM box.

When I said "finally"... what I meant was "Finally you are seeing things from my perspective".

And regarding this thread, yes it was an Indian poster who started it and he is now banned. The guy in the other thread laughing about Japanese war crimes has not been banned, strangely enough.

It is so common though, that it's not really a surprise.


----------



## Varad

tanlixiang28776 said:


> It was America and they came in because they were attacked by Japan as well. Otherwise they never would have gotten involved.


 
precisely my point which said Manchuria would not be free if the allied forces did not focus on Japan. The mistake Japan made was attacking the US


----------



## aristocrat

Man Chinese trollers on a roll today.SOmebody just pointed out that Russia and china had some issues,And chinese had to drag india in.And then they say we r the ones with insecurities


----------



## Abhishek_

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Oh right sorry, I just cleared my PM box.
> 
> When I said "finally"... what I meant was "Finally you are seeing things from my perspective".
> 
> And regarding this thread, yes it was an Indian poster who started it and he is now banned. The guy in the other thread laughing about Japanese war crimes has not been banned, strangely enough.


 
lol CD remember my remark about the cheap entertainment (it stands)

members who find such atrocities funny are seriously F&*#ked in the head, they will be banned sooner or later. accept my apologies on their behalf my dear friend

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## below_freezing

Varad said:


> precisely my point which said Manchuria would not be free if the allied forces did not focus on Japan. The mistake Japan made was attacking the US


 
Is the Republic of China, now on Taiwan, a fully sovereign and independent nation?


----------



## tanlixiang28776

aristocrat said:


> Man Chinese trollers on a roll today.SOmebody just pointed out that Russia and china had some issues,And chinese had to drag india in.And then they say we r the ones with insecurities


 
Indians started trolling



Adnan Faruqi said:


> Zamboanga Today Online, the most read newspaper in Zamboanga City | China accuses PH of
> 
> Vietnam and China pledge to settle South China Sea disputes - Monsters and Critics
> 
> China Mongolia Border Clashes 1947-1948
> 
> Tajikistan gives China land to settle century-old dispute
> 
> Not to forget Japan, India and pakistan have happily given disputed kashmir's major part to China.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

I love how the Asians here, who's countries were all exploited and crushed by the Western powers + Japan, are all going for each other's throats with greater ferocity than they would have done against the old colonial powers themselves.

I've never seen an Indian bash Britain, it's always Pakistan or China.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abhishek_

tan, the appropriate response would be to report it. counter trolling is equally destructive

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Abhishek_ said:


> tan, the appropriate response would be to report it. counter trolling is equally destructive


 
But thats no fun.

Besides the mods generally don't do anything when it comes to something like this. Remember that **** incident? Took hours.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abhishek_

Chinese-Dragon said:


> I love how the Asians here, who's countries were all exploited and crushed by the Western powers + Japan, are all going for each other's throats with greater ferocity than they would have done against the old colonial powers themselves.
> 
> I've never seen an Indian bash Britain, it's always Pakistan or China.


 
by-product of a non-violent freedom struggle i guess. we parted on friendly terms


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Abhishek_ said:


> lol CD remember my remark about the cheap entertainment (it stands)
> 
> members who find such atrocities funny are seriously F&*#ked in the head, they will be banned sooner or later. accept my apologies on their behalf my dear friend


 
LOL you can't apologize on behalf of someone else.

Anyway the troll has been banned, so maybe it's time to get back to the topic.


----------



## Abhishek_

tanlixiang28776 said:


> But thats no fun.
> 
> Besides the mods generally don't do anything when it comes to something like this. Remember that **** incident? Took hours.


 
as long as people remember its all in good fun i'm cool with it. i've seen some members take things to heart and change their real life outlooks about each other


----------



## Varad

Chinese-Dragon said:


> I love how the Asians here, who's countries were all exploited and crushed by the Western powers + Japan, are all going for each other's throats with greater ferocity than they would have done against the old colonial powers themselves.
> 
> I've never seen an Indian bash Britain, it's always Pakistan or China.


 
This is the reason i seriously beleive China which has that potential will not be able to overtake USA. Just see how much divided things here are and look there. You dont see Canada and Mexico fighting with US. Need a peaceful neighbour hood to grow.


----------



## Peshwa

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Actually you did, when you backstabbed us in 1959 by hosting our largest separatist group.
> 
> Before that, there were no serious issues in the China-India relationship.


 
There is no backstabbing....

Helping refugees is not a crime....plain and simple.... and thats what we did....and mind you....not once did India question Tibets union with China....we do consider that a part of your country...

You can argue about how that was an act of aggression but wont be able to prove it....

Maybe then you should stop supporting Pakistan and arming it with missiles and nukes before lecture us on "sensitivities"


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Varad said:


> This is the reason i seriously beleive China which has that potential will not be able to overtake USA. Just see how much divided things here are and look there. You dont see Canada and Mexico fighting with US. Need a peaceful neighbour hood to grow.


 
We aren't fighting with anybody. 

You guys are the ones still clashing violently with Pakistan and against Kashmir-based militants.

We haven't had a war with anybody for 40 years.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Peshwa said:


> There is no backstabbing....
> 
> Helping refugees is not a crime....plain and simple.... and thats what we did....and mind you....not once did India question Tibets union with China....we do consider that a part of your country...
> 
> You can argue about how that was an act of aggression but wont be able to prove it....
> 
> Maybe then you should stop supporting Pakistan and arming it with missiles and nukes before lecture us on "sensitivities"


 
They were not just refugees back then. They were defeated after a failed armed rebellion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Varad

below_freezing said:


> Is the Republic of China, now on Taiwan, a fully sovereign and independent nation?


 
China says if Taiwan states independence they will attack them, Taiwan has remained silence so far. By the way did you know that ROC;s map of China includes outer Mongolia as well whereas CPC recognizes it as a sovereign state.


----------



## SpArK

http://www.defence.pk/forums/india-defence/104842-india-finally-stands-up-russias-after-sales-whim.html

A bashable thread.. pls participate.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> China says if Taiwan states independence they will attack them, Taiwan has remained silence so far. By the way did you know that ROC;s map of China includes outer Mongolia as well whereas CPC recognizes it as a sovereign state.


 
Did you notice that they also claim Southern Tibet?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## below_freezing

It's funny how some Indians talk. They say Taiwan is independent, then they say CHINA "lost" against Japan. Hello? The government on Taiwan was the government in China back then. If Taiwan is independent, then Taiwan lost against Japan, nothing to do with China. If Taiwan isn't independent, then thanks for admitting that Taiwan is part of China.



Varad said:


> China says if Taiwan states independence they will attack them, Taiwan has remained silence so far. By the way did you know that ROC;s map of China includes outer Mongolia as well whereas CPC recognizes it as a sovereign state.


 
Perfect example. ROC signed the ROC-Soviet agreement that let Mongolia go in 1920, before the CPC even began. Only in 1949, after they lost the war and went to Taiwan, did they "unrecognize" Outer Mongolia.

Now I'm fine with Mongolia being gone. We buy their resources anyways.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Bigoren

aristocrat said:


> Man Chinese trollers on a roll today.SOmebody just pointed out that Russia and china had some issues,And chinese had to drag india in.And then they say we r the ones with insecurities


 
Not much than indian troll here.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Peshwa said:


> Maybe then you should stop supporting Pakistan and arming it with missiles and nukes before lecture us on "sensitivities"


 
That all happened after 1959. Cause and effect, as they might say.


----------



## Varad

Chinese-Dragon said:


> We aren't fighting with anybody.
> 
> You guys are the ones still clashing violently with Pakistan and against Kashmir-based militants.
> 
> We haven't had a war with anybody for 40 years.



Dont act innocent. You have also have issues with your neighbours. Have you forgotten about the allegations which the ASEAN countries made last month on your claims on South China sea.


----------



## Varad

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Did you notice that they also claim Southern Tibet?


 
I notice that both CPC and ROC claims it and i also notice that any Indian goverment cares two hoots.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> Dont act innocent. You have also have issues with your neighbours. Have you forgotten about the allegations which the ASEAN countries made last month on your claims on South China sea.


 
Allegations. Perhaps you should look at both sides of the issue instead of simply pointing at China.

Oh and not a single bullet has been fired yet.


----------



## Peshwa

Bigoren said:


> Maybe india should return all land that occupid by india illegally like kashmir and "aruchanal" to Pakistan and China.


 
Start with Tibet and then come talk to me about illegal occupation......till then we prefer to live in peace....

The ones trying to conquer our lands are to blame for aggression, not us....


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Varad said:


> Dont act innocent. You have also have issues with your neighbours. Have you forgotten about the allegations which the ASEAN countries made last month on your claims on South China sea.


 
Yeah but there is no violent conflict, only verbal spats.

Nothing compared to the Mumbai attacks for example.

Like I said, China has not fought a war with anybody for 40 years.


----------



## Varad

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Allegations. Perhaps you should look at both sides of the issue instead of simply pointing at China.


 
Its not about true or false. Its about whether there are issues or not.


----------



## Abhishek_

Chinese-Dragon said:


> We aren't fighting with anybody.
> 
> You guys are the ones still clashing violently with Pakistan and against Kashmir-based militants.
> 
> We haven't had a war with anybody for 40 years.



tell your all weather friend to stop getting wet over kashmir, we aren't the ones who started the clashes.
how come china ends up befriending the crazies, similar traits perhaps?


----------



## Ammyy

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Yeah but there is no violent conflict, only verbal spats.
> 
> Nothing compared to the Mumbai attacks for example.
> 
> Like I said, China has not fought a war with anybody for 40 years.


 
so that makes you peaceful neighbor ???

What a joke 

Look at your history full of violence and war with every neighbor


----------



## Peshwa

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Disputes are won by those that have diplomatic, historical, and military superiority.
> 
> None of which you possessed back then, or even now.



Right back at you.....

Not like China has been able to win what it claims its lands from India.....so what exactly are you boasting about?


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Abhishek_ said:


> tell your all weather friend to stop getting wet over kashmir, we aren't the ones who started the clashes.


 
We don't have that much power over Pakistan.


----------



## Varad

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Yeah but there is no violent conflict, only verbal spats.
> 
> Nothing compared to the Mumbai attacks for example.
> 
> Like I said, China has not fought a war with anybody for 40 years.



Be careful here. In other words you are implying a country did actually do Mumbai for the sake of animosity.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> Be careful here. In other words you are implying a country did actually do Mumbai for the sake of animosity.


 
Terrorists are not a countries will.

Most terrorist in 9/11 are form Saudi Arabia. We're still bestest friends with them.


----------



## Ammyy

Varad said:


> Be careful here. In other words you are implying a country did actually do Mumbai for the sake of animosity.


 
Dnt expect any thing else they have same view for all terrorist attack any where

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

DRDO said:


> so that makes you peaceful neighbor ???
> 
> What a joke
> 
> Look at your history full of violence and war with every neighbor


 
LOL when did I say it makes us "peaceful"? The fact is that India is the one who is still in violent conflict with it's neighbours.

China's conflicts are diplomatic and verbal, not violent.

So it is a case of the pot calling the kettle black, or as I said before, 50 steps laughing at 100 steps.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

DRDO said:


> Dnt expect any thing else they have same view for all terrorist attack any where


 
We do. They all should get the death penalty.


----------



## Varad

Chinese-Dragon said:


> LOL when did I say it makes us "peaceful"? The fact is that India is the one who is still in violent conflict with it's neighbours.
> 
> China's conflicts are diplomatic and verbal, not violent.
> 
> So it is a case of the pot calling the kettle black, or as I said before, 50 steps laughing at 100 steps.



After 1999 how many wars have we fought?


----------



## Bigoren

DRDO said:


> so that makes you peaceful neighbor ???
> 
> What a joke
> 
> Look at your history full of violence and war with every neighbor


 
Every neighbour?Go get some education before trsh talk here.You are embarasing yourself dude.


----------



## Abhishek_

Chinese-Dragon said:


> LOL when did I say it makes us "peaceful"? The fact is that India is the one who is still in violent conflict with it's neighbours.
> 
> China's conflicts are diplomatic and verbal, not violent.
> 
> So it is a case of the pot calling the kettle black, or as I said before, 50 steps laughing at 100 steps.


 
the only neighbor we have a violent clash with is your all weather friend. and judging by where that has led it I don't see it going further.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Varad said:


> Be careful here. In other words you are implying a country did actually do Mumbai for the sake of animosity.


 
I never implicated any specific country, but the fact is that they did originate from Kashmir.

And are thus a product of the long running conflict that India has had with it's neighbours.


----------



## Peshwa

Chinese-Dragon said:


> If Indians want to laugh about Japanese war crimes, then we have the right to point out, that at least we FOUGHT for our country.



Both countries fought in different ways....one was peaceful, the other ripe with bloodshed....

Only difference is that our way saved a lot of lives and was emulated by people of the only superpower in the world....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Varad

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Terrorists are not a countries will.
> 
> Most terrorist in 9/11 are form Saudi Arabia. We're still bestest friends with them.


 
Man if terrorists are being originated from India to carry out attacks on China, then i will see that as the Indian Goverment's failure not China. And this is not for one major terrorist attack, but about decades of insurgency.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Peshwa said:


> Both countries fought in different ways....one was peaceful, the other ripe with bloodshed....
> 
> Only difference is that our way saved a lot of lives and was emulated by people of the only superpower in the world....


 
There is a difference. Japan was never going to be convinced with peaceful protests and wasn't getting destroyed by Germany.

Britain was.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ammyy

Chinese-Dragon said:


> LOL when did I say it makes us "peaceful"? The fact is that India is the one who is still in violent conflict with it's neighbours.
> 
> *China's conflicts are diplomatic and verbal, not violent.*
> 
> So it is a case of the pot calling the kettle black, or as I said before, 50 steps laughing at 100 steps.


----------



## Varad

Chinese-Dragon said:


> I never implicated any specific country, but the fact is that they did originate from Kashmir.
> 
> And are thus a product of the long running conflict that India has had with it's neighbours.


 
Not with neighbours but with a neighbour. Also it did not originate from Kashmir but from someplace else.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Peshwa said:


> Both countries fought in different ways....one was peaceful, the other ripe with bloodshed....
> 
> Only difference is that our way saved a lot of lives and was emulated by people of the only superpower in the world....


 
What, you think we should have gone for "non-violent resistance" against the Japanese?

And hope that one day they would just let us go? Out of the kindness of their hearts?



Peshwa said:


> Only difference is that our way saved a lot of lives and was emulated by people of the only superpower in the world....



And who is ahead now?


----------



## Peshwa

Chinese-Dragon said:


> I love how the Asians here, who's countries were all exploited and crushed by the Western powers + Japan, are all going for each other's throats with greater ferocity than they would have done against the old colonial powers themselves.
> 
> I've never seen an Indian bash Britain, it's always Pakistan or China.



Bash Britain for what? We live in the here and now.....and what affects us is NOW....

So if the past is so important....why dont you stop all trade with Japan that has committed more atrocities on the Chinese than anything the British did....
But you wont.....because your benefit from it...
Similarly, Britain has only been an ally since our independence.....

Its very easy to preach you know.....


----------



## Abhishek_

Chinese-Dragon said:


> What, you think we should have gone for "non-violent resistance" against the Japanese?
> 
> And hope that one day they would just let us go? Out of the kindness of their hearts?
> 
> 
> 
> And who is ahead now?


 
how does freedom struggle equate to economic prosperity? if it were true, your all weather friend would be the second fastest growing trillion dollar economy


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Peshwa said:


> Bash Britain for what? We live in the here and now.....and what affects us is NOW....
> 
> So if the past is so important....why dont you stop all trade with Japan that has committed more atrocities on the Chinese than anything the British did....
> But you wont.....because your benefit from it...
> Similarly, Britain has only been an ally since our independence.....
> 
> Its very easy to preach you know.....


 
I'm not preaching.

It is well known that China's historical enemy is Japan. Everyone knows it.

India's great enemy is of course Pakistan. Everyone knows it.

Why not the British, who were the ones who exploited you guys, and split you up in the first place? Why is your greatest enemy your neighbour who was born on the same day you were, and equally mistreated by the same colonial power (Britain)?

I'm not saying you should attack them, or hurt them diplomatically/economically... just that it's confusing as to why you hate Pakistan and China yet like Britain.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abhishek_

unlike some, we know how to let by-gones be.
some countries can't look past the chip on their shoulders


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Abhishek_ said:


> unlike some, we know how to let by-gones be.
> some countries can't look past the chip on their shoulders


 
We forgive many. Japan is not on that list.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Abhishek_ said:


> unlike some, we know how to let by-gones be.
> some countries can't look past the chip on their shoulders


 
LOL really?

Your relationship with Pakistan (no further explanation needed) and China (1962 omg!) tells a different story.

It's not the Chinese media that is running stories about a future Sino-Indian war, it is the Indian media. That tells you who has a chip on their shoulder. And don't worry, I'll spare you the NDTV quotes and the quotes from the Indian army.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abhishek_

tanlixiang28776 said:


> We forgive many. Japan is not on that list.


 

precisely my point


----------



## Peshwa

tanlixiang28776 said:


> They were not just refugees back then. They were defeated after a failed armed rebellion.


 
It is not India's duty to question the morality of their struggle.....

All we did was give them refuge....There is no international law that says that giving refuge is a crime....

Now if you can prove that India supported armed rebellion in Tibet, then maybe you have yourself a case...

So with this logic why not bring up the case of Pakistan taking in Afghan refugees that went on to become the Taliban....Shouldnt you be blaming Pakistan as being the instigator of the current situation? Shouldnt the US have beef with Pakistan?
But you dont....why?


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

tanlixiang28776 said:


> We forgive many. Japan is not on that list.


 
True, but that doesn't stop us doing business with them either.

In fact, China is currently Japan's largest trading partner.

China and Japan also have the largest bilateral economic relationship in Asia.


----------



## Ammyy

Bigoren said:


> Every neighbour?Go get some education before trsh talk here.You are embarasing yourself dude.


 
India, Japan, Vietnam, magnolia, Korean War 

Land dispute with Taiwan, Bhutan, Vietnam, Philippines Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei
List of territorial disputes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think its time for your embarrassment


----------



## Abhishek_

Chinese-Dragon said:


> *And don't worry, I'll spare you the NDTV quotes and the quotes from the Indian army*.


 
thanks for using your IQ for once. we all greatly appreciate it


----------



## tanlixiang28776

DRDO said:


> India, Japan, Vietnam,* magnolia*, Korean War
> 
> Land dispute with Taiwan, Bhutan, Vietnam, Philippines Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei
> List of territorial disputes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> I think its time for your embarrassment


 
I didn't think we had disputes with the flower kingdom. Thanks for the education.


----------



## Varad

Chinese-Dragon said:


> I'm not preaching.
> 
> It is well known that China's historical enemy is Japan. Everyone knows it.
> 
> India's great enemy is of course Pakistan. Everyone knows it.
> 
> Why not the British, who were the ones who exploited you guys, and split you up in the first place? Why is your greatest enemy your neighbour who was born on the same day you were, and equally mistreated by the same colonial power (Britain)?
> 
> I'm not saying you should attack them, or hurt them diplomatically/economically... just that it's confusing as to why you hate Pakistan and China yet like Britain.


 
British occupied almost all the world ( Hong Kong and parts of Tibet included) so nations have learned to live with it. Also, in someways British arrival is considered helpful for India. Regarding Pakistan, you have to have some affection towards someone you have fought so many wars.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Varad said:


> Also, in someways British arrival is considered helpful for India.


 
What? Do some Indians now think that colonialism was a good thing?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Varad

tanlixiang28776 said:


> I didn't think we had disputes with the flower kingdom. Thanks for the education.


 
There are many things citizens of Communism dont know and thinking they are always right, they bash others.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> There are many things citizens of Communism dont know and thinking they are always right, they bash others.


 
Yes we should bring back McCarthy from the dead and chase out all the communists in America.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Abhishek_ said:


> thanks for using your IQ for once. we all greatly appreciate it


 
Your point was completely wrong though.

India has a HUGE chip on their shoulder regarding China and Pakistan. We can clearly see this from the Indian media.

What I'm saying, is that it's strange that India is so angry towards their fellow Asian neighbours, even though we all went through exploitation by the West + Japan.

In theory, India should empathize with us, since we are fellow developing countries, that were also victims of colonialism. Instead, India empathizes with the West and the former colonial powers.

And India's two greatest enemies are Pakistan and China.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Varad

Chinese-Dragon said:


> What? Do some Indians now think that colonialism was a good thing?


 
No, but there were some practices carried out in the rural India. The education the British brought helped us remove it although they are still here in someplaces. Also they brought to India lates technologies of the time. However, the damage done by them far outweighed these benefits and people revolted.

---------- Post added at 01:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:50 AM ----------




tanlixiang28776 said:


> Yes we should bring back McCarthy from the dead and chase out all the communists in America.


 
and what about your great nation. Any ideas?


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Varad said:


> No, but there were some practices carried out in the rural India.


 
Oh right I see.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> and what about your great nation. Any ideas?


 
Same thing of course.


----------



## Peshwa

Chinese-Dragon said:


> That all happened after 1959. Cause and effect, as they might say.



Sure...you could say that....

But difference being....India never allowed political activity by the DL and Tibetians living in India...

As you yourself said....China has no insurgencies....if India were arming the Tibetans through the exiled govt, would that be true?
So then we are giving them refuge.....and its not hurting China in any way possible...
So wheres the beef?

China is actively supporting and arming Pakistan against India.....BIG DIFFERENCE...
An act of giving someone refuge vs. building up an enemy to fight another neighbor....Dont you see which is more detrimental to our relationship>?


----------



## Abhishek_

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Your point was completely wrong though.
> 
> India has a HUGE chip on their shoulder regarding China and Pakistan. We can clearly see this from the Indian media.
> 
> What I'm saying, is that it's strange that India is so angry towards their fellow Asian neighbours, even though we all went through exploitation by the West + Japan.


 
there is no chip mate, we've always wanted better relationships with pakistan and china. glad to say chinese and indian administrations have kept things quiet and developed good trading ties.
I wish pakistani administration would have done the same but they are holding trading ties hostage to kashmir which leads to a deadlock.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Peshwa said:


> China is actively supporting and arming Pakistan against India.....BIG DIFFERENCE...
> An act of giving someone refuge vs. building up an enemy to fight another neighbor....Dont you see which is more detrimental to our relationship>?



America has done that longer and with far more weapons. Why don't you care about that more?

We just don't like being singled out.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Varad

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Same thing of course.


 
Yes i tend to forget Chinese citizens posting here are not really in China otherwise you wont have such a liberty to talk on these issues. Let there be any governing idealogy be it democracy or communism as long the people are happy and there is peace both external and internal.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

tanlixiang28776 said:


> America has done that longer and with far more weapons. Why don't you care about that more?
> 
> We just don't like being singled out.


 
America was (and still remains) the biggest source of external funding for the Pakistan Army. Yet there are no scaremongering articles about them in the Indian media.

This goes back to the same trend, that India's greatest enemies are fellow developing countries in Asia, who were also exploited by the colonial powers. China and Pakistan went through all the same hardships that India did at the hands of the colonial powers, you would think that they would empathize with us.

Instead, we're their greatest enemies, while they look up to the West... i.e. the formal colonialists.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abhishek_

tanlixiang28776 said:


> America has done that longer and with far more weapons. Why don't you care about that more?
> 
> We just don't like being singled out.


 
fair point tan, but allow me to point out that pakistan deliberately went in to the US bloc in cold war days thinking it will take kashmir back militarily.
the fault lies with pakistani military establishment. fyi even in that time we were in NAM


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> Yes i tend to forget Chinese citizens posting here are not really in China otherwise you wont have such a liberty to talk on these issues. Let there be any governing idealogy be it democracy or communism as long the people are happy and there is peace both external and internal.


 
Actually you can. As long as it doesn't involve treason, or sedition. 

There are actually government forums where you can bring up issues and complain.


----------



## Varad

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Actually you can. As long as it doesn't involve treason, or sedition.
> 
> There are actually government forums where you can bring up issues and complain.



Thanks man i did'nt know this. Can you guys freely discuss complicated issues on these forums amongst yourself.?


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Actually you can. As long as it doesn't involve treason, or sedition.
> 
> There are actually government forums where you can bring up issues and complain.


 
That is right, it's a common misconception. In fact, Chinese forums are full of all sorts of insults against all kinds of political leaders.

Even in this forum, we have mainlanders who openly say "fu*k Hu Jintao, fu*k Wen Jiabao!"

Though personally, I would say "fu*k Jiang Zemin!" (Since I like Hu/Wen a lot more than Jiang).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Peshwa

tanlixiang28776 said:


> There is a difference. Japan was never going to be convinced with peaceful protests and wasn't getting destroyed by Germany.
> 
> Britain was.


 
Agreed and my point was to highlight the difference....

Unlike Japan, Indians werent facing atrocities at the hands of the British......so werent cornered into an armed conflict....

My point was.....there is no need to undermine the struggle of our people....Chinese or Indians...We are only scoring cheap points here

Theres 2 things:
Chinese dont like being picked on about the Japanese atrocities
Indians dont like their freedom struggle or their existance (India never existed) questioned....

If we stay away from these 2 uber sensitive topics....there is still room for sane discussions

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> Thanks man i did'nt know this. Can you guys freely discuss complicated issues on these forums amongst yourself.?


 
Just don't talk about overthrowing the government. Anything else is fair game.


----------



## Bigoren

DRDO said:


> India, Japan, Vietnam, magnolia, Korean War
> 
> Land dispute with Taiwan, Bhutan, Vietnam, Philippines Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei
> List of territorial disputes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> I think its time for your embarrassment


 
Hey,its your statement said EVERY neighbours,do you know how many neighbour does China has?kOREAN WAR AND MONGOLIA COUNTED IN?Stop embarasing again for yourself.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Just don't talk about overthrowing the government. Anything else is fair game.


 
In fact you can talk about that stuff and get away with it, as long as you don't actually try to start a political movement.

Here in Hong Kong though, we can start political movements all day long. But the CPC is popular enough, to make such parties mostly irrelevant.


----------



## Varad

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Just don't talk about overthrowing the government. Anything else is fair game.


 
So what is this that we here about this great firewall China has for its netizens for example- no one can search Dalai Lama, Jasmine revolution and all that.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Varad said:


> So what is this that we here about this great firewall China has for its netizens for example- no one can search Dalai Lama, Jasmine revolution and all that.


 
Exactly what it says. It's a firewall.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> So what is this that we here about this great firewall China has for its netizens for example- no one can search Dalai Lama, Jasmine revolution and all that.


 
And forums and discussions are not firewalled unless you try to overthrow the government.

Just get it from Hong Kong servers. Google is still there.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

tanlixiang28776 said:


> And forums and discussions are not firewalled unless you try to overthrow the government.
> 
> Just get it from Hong Kong servers. Google is still there.


 
Or just jump the firewall (use a proxy). It is actually very common.


----------



## Peshwa

Chinese-Dragon said:


> What, you think we should have gone for "non-violent resistance" against the Japanese?
> 
> And hope that one day they would just let us go? Out of the kindness of their hearts?



No one questioned your method.... You obviously missed the point



> And who is ahead now?


 
Could you have said that 50 years ago? Everything makes sense in hindsight...

And do you think that the current success of your country is because of your violent past? Actually I think it caused more problems for you than solutions....

And as far as "who is ahead" goes both countries are not that far apart and far behind the western countries, especially America....
So "who is ahead" is a relative term...

And not like our method got us


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Peshwa said:


> And as far as "who is ahead" goes both countries are not that far apart and far behind the western countries, especially America....


 
We are certainly both behind the Western countries, but there is still a fairly large disparity between China and India.

I don't attribute any success to violence in our past. However, I am pretty sure that going for non-violent resistance in front of the highly racist Imperial Japanese Army would have been a disaster. 

Have you heard of Unit 731? Unit 731 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Around 20 million innocent Chinese civilians were butched by the Imperial Japanese army. Imagine how much worse it would have been if we didn't try to stop them.


----------



## ZhengHe

Abhishek_ said:


> said the country with north korea and pakistan as the only real allies


 
LOL i bet not even India dare mess with North Korea. North Korea scares even the US.

And Pakistan? They have the most superior/best trained air force in South Asia, so good luck India!


----------



## Varad

ZhengHe said:


> LOL i bet not even India dare mess with North Korea. North Korea scares even the US.
> 
> And Pakistan? They have the most superior/best trained air force in South Asia, so good luck India!


 
God help the country that messes with South Korea and regarding Pakistan dont worry we have been upto it for the last 63 years.


----------



## Varad

tanlixiang28776 said:


> And forums and discussions are not firewalled unless you try to overthrow the government.
> 
> Just get it from Hong Kong servers. Google is still there.



Good to know that you have freedom on net, this will reduce the trust deficit you have with India.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

Varad said:


> Good to know that you have freedom on net, this will reduce the trust deficit you have with India.


 
I'm in America dude. 

I'm not CD.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Peshwa

Chinese-Dragon said:


> India's great enemy is of course Pakistan. Everyone knows it.



Have you thought about why? Did we ever committ atrocities on the Pakistanis for them to seperate? We didnt even have freedom when Pakistani leaders accused Hindus/present day Indians of being hegemonic....
When faced with a foe that has made up its mind to hate your existance....are we left with any choices?



> Why not the British, who were the ones who exploited you guys, and split you up in the first place? Why is your greatest enemy your neighbour who was born on the same day you were, and equally mistreated by the same colonial power (Britain)?



As I mentioned....The british did not committ atrocities....Exploitation and atrocities are very different.....and a different punishment fits the crime for each...
Exploitation was our own fault....we allowed it....Our kings allowed it....anyone with aspirations would take advantage.....The British were never our friends...

On the other hand, Pakistan tried to take on an armed struggle into Kashmir....especially when we had the instrument of ascession to prove our legitimate right....followed by arming Kashmiris against us....
Incidents like Mumbai massacre are not something that friends or neighbors do...



> I'm not saying you should attack them, or hurt them diplomatically/economically... just that it's confusing as to why you hate Pakistan and China yet like Britain.


 
Which is why Indians outside of the subcontinent get along just fine.....Its only when we are neighbors that we get to each others throats.


----------



## ZhengHe

tanlixiang28776 said:


> America certainly didn't care about China when they started invading Japan. It was in their own interests. As for India you didn't even fight for your own country. Britain let you go because they were too busy getting pwned by Germany.


 
3 thousand Brits Vs. 300 *million* Indians 

Indians didn't even put up a fight. It's amazing how easy their country got colonized. But from an Indian point of view, their highest point of civilization and richest part of history was during British Rule.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

ZhengHe said:


> 3000 Brits Vs. 300,000,000 million Indians
> 
> Indians didn't even put up a fight. It's amazing.


 
We're having a civil conversation now.

Or not. (looks down)


----------



## prototype

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Said the country with no one as its real ally.
> 
> Russia is already with China, both are founding members of the SCO.



Congrats now ur member of a new galactic order,SCO,it sounds Draconian,Russian's r now not with us what can we do.



Chinese-Dragon said:


> China is the biggest trading partner of all those countries.  And there is no open conflict with any country.



Open conflicts r the story of past my friend,and I like the way u love to twist the realities,So japan and China r fiend because of trade,nothing happened anything between,no we did not saw anything,we were in deep sleep.



Chinese-Dragon said:


> India on the other hand is still fighting militants and insurgents, and has been having military conflict with its neighbours up till recent times. Even up till 2008 with the Mumbai attacks.
> 
> *You guys are getting smacked by everyone around you, and you're pointing fingers at China? *&#20116;&#21313;&#27493;&#31505;&#30334;&#27493;&#12290;


 
I feel if u were true,because all those nation's keep complaining how we r smacking their a$$,at a time when we even did nothing,good u understand the truth.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

tanlixiang28776 said:


> We're having a civil conversation now.
> 
> Or not. (looks down)


 
LOL I thought it ended when the Indian troll was banned.


----------



## Paan Singh

ZhengHe said:


> LOL i bet not even India dare mess with North Korea. North Korea scares even the US.
> 
> *And Pakistan? They have the most superior/best trained air force in South Asia, so good luck India!*



i agree with the bold part


----------



## ZhengHe

Varad said:


> You mean gifted as China which if it was not for the west would have the name of Japan written all over it by now.


 
Didn't your colonial master teach you history? The India today did NOT exist. You need to thank your colonial master for uniting what is today known as India.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

ZhengHe said:


> Didn't your colonial master teach you history? The India today did NOT exist. You need to thank your colonial master for uniting what is today known as India.


 
Calm down. Respond to recent posts so we don't have to keep rehashing things.


----------



## below_freezing

Varad said:


> So what is this that we here about this great firewall China has for its netizens for example- no one can search Dalai Lama, Jasmine revolution and all that.


 
It's reverse censorship. Negative evidence about white racism in the West is blocked. In fact, negative comments about India are also absent from the official media. However, people on forums know about US KKK, stormfront, white supremacy, Russian skinheads, australian skinheads killing a Chinese professor and only getting 15 years, etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Peshwa

tanlixiang28776 said:


> America has done that longer and with far more weapons. Why don't you care about that more?
> 
> We just don't like being singled out.



Because we have always had a neutral relationship with the US......not the case with China....

So in this case, if on one hand you say you want peace, but on the other you arm our enemies, then it creates further barriers to our relationship....
Compare that to us giving your enemies (Tibetians and DL) refuge and you can see how what we did was not aggressive or at least used to agress against the Chinese...

And unlike the US, China gave Pakistan the bomb that is being used as a tool for blackmail....US never provided Pakistan with weapons that would create imbalance....China did...

Do note that the US pre 65 war was arming India and Pak....so the US example is not apt

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ZhengHe

Chinese-Dragon said:


> I love how the Asians here, who's countries were all exploited and crushed by the Western powers + Japan, are all going for each other's throats with greater ferocity than they would have done against the old colonial powers themselves.
> 
> I've never seen an Indian bash Britain, it's always Pakistan or China.


 

Indians had always worshiped Brits (white people) as Gods, ever since the days of colonization. Why you do think they never put up a fight? They would also never bad mouth a Brit because to them, Brits are of the highest caste and Indians at any level are below Brits and other "white" people.

Not even Indians will try to deny this.


----------



## tanlixiang28776

ZhengHe said:


> Indians had always worshiped Brits (white people) as Gods, ever since the days of colonization. Why you do think they never put up a fight? They would also never bad mouth a Brit because to them, Brits are of the highest caste and Indians at any level are below Brits and other "white" people.


 
Please just stop and try to have a civil discussion.


----------



## ZhengHe

DRDO said:


> so that makes you peaceful neighbor ???
> 
> What a joke
> 
> Look at your history full of violence and war with every neighbor


 
Why don't you take a look at your colonial masters? History full of violence and war with the ENTIRE WORLD. India should know this 1st hand!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Peshwa

Chinese-Dragon said:


> America was (and still remains) the biggest source of external funding for the Pakistan Army. Yet there are no scaremongering articles about them in the Indian media.
> 
> This goes back to the same trend, that India's greatest enemies are fellow developing countries in Asia, who were also exploited by the colonial powers. China and Pakistan went through all the same hardships that India did at the hands of the colonial powers, you would think that they would empathize with us.
> 
> Instead, we're their greatest enemies, while they look up to the West... i.e. the formal colonialists.


 
You do realize that we have no outstanding dispute with the US....
So you're saying that we should attribute the ill effects of colonialism to all western countries irrespective of whether they actually harmed us or not?

I mentioned this before.....We live in the NOW and what matters in NOW....in the present day scenario, the US has not done anything to harm us....
Even the F-16s provided to Pakistan are to keep parity NOT one up India....
and just like the Chinese...who althought being aginst the colonialist still do business with them, we Indians consider this Business only....not personal....

Though you do claim that Indians are aggressive towards China when China is the reason why Pakistan has the bomb that is being used to blackmail us....

I hope you see why we find trouble in our relationship.....It not about Asia vs the west, its about who benefits our position more....
"There are no permanent enemies, only permanent interests"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Paan Singh

ZhengHe said:


> Indians had always worshiped Brits (white people) as Gods, ever since the days of colonization. Why you do think they never put up a fight? They would also never bad mouth a Brit because to them, Brits are of the highest caste and Indians at any level are below Brits and other "white" people.
> 
> Not even Indians will try to deny this.


 
ur condition is like ur avatar.........when did indians worshipped brits as god??
even the same brits are now bragging abt relationship with india as most important...


----------



## Varad

Prism said:


> ur condition is like ur avatar.........when did indians worshipped brits as god??
> even the same brits are now bragging abt relationship with india as most important...


 
rehne de bhai. in jaiso ka koi ilaaj nahi


----------



## ZhengHe

tanlixiang28776 said:


> We're having a civil conversation now.
> 
> Or not. (looks down)


 
I started at page 1 so I'm just responding to Indian trolls.

I'm done.


----------



## Peshwa

Chinese-Dragon said:


> We are certainly both behind the Western countries, but there is still a fairly large disparity between China and India.
> 
> I don't attribute any success to violence in our past. However, I am pretty sure that going for non-violent resistance in front of the highly racist Imperial Japanese Army would have been a disaster.
> 
> Have you heard of Unit 731? Unit 731 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Around 20 million innocent Chinese civilians were butched by the Imperial Japanese army. Imagine how much worse it would have been if we didn't try to stop them.



Your struggle was obviously required.....Non violence is not always the answer....sometimes bloodshed is required...maybe even call it a way of nature to maintain balance...

My intention was to not undermine each others struggles.....Your statement earlier about "We at least fought" was wrong because a fight is not always bloody and bloody wars arent always the popular ones either....
It all depends on what you have to wield when you fight....we had our will and strength of mind....you had your arms....we both used it to achieve the goal...
Both with advantages and disadvantages

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## no_name

Just amazing how a thread posted today could grow to 17 pages, do everyone who posts actually read all the previous posts?

Are we discussing the thread topic?


----------



## Akasa

Prism said:


> yes,firstly u copy n take their tech,,,then criticize their techh


 
The former happened in the 1970s.

The latter is happening now.


We live in a fourth dimension called time.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Akasa

REEVER said:


> If your tech is so good why hack a pentagon network to see f 35 blueprint to help with j20
> 
> If the tech is so amazing why make the j 11 a blatant copy if the sukhoi
> 
> If your tech is so good why use us tech in the form of isreali Protoype to build the j 10
> 
> Why is your ws-10 a rip off GE engine
> 
> 
> 
> Why?


 
1. F-35 isn't Russian.

2. J-11B is not a copy of the Sukhoi, and it nears performance of the Su-35BM.

3. J-10 was developed from J-9, genius. I bet you don't even know what that is.

4. The "rip off" of the GE engine performs better than the actual GE engine. Go figure.


Seems like somebody has some researching to do, boy.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Akasa

Prism said:


> how many passengers can sit in su-35.....???toilet facilities,internet facilities????


 
Yes, you can fit 10 pilots in the single seat cockpit.


----------



## Obambam

SinoSoldier said:


> Yes, you can fit 10 pilots in the single seat cockpit.


 
it is called a 'cockpit' for a reason. All you got to do is stack them all up vertically


----------



## Akasa

Obambam said:


> it is called a 'cockpit' for a reason. All you got to do is stack them all up vertically


 
 I think Prism will find this explanation quite helpful.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## anonymous123

Those aircraft are more likely to defend against japan than China.........does China still have any territorial dispute with Russia??i thought everything has been settled not too long ago


----------



## ptldM3

Pakchina said:


> Since when China is an enemy of Russia. The latter is supplying military equipment to China since the 1070's. Of course now *China is no more procuring Russian equipment *due to the following reasons:




So it is a cover-up?




Pakchina said:


> Chinese military equipment has surpassed Russian weapons





What engines are in the JF-17 again? 




Pakchina said:


> - Russia's technology is outdated




Vague statment just like the the one above, but if that is true than much of China's technology is also outdated since China still uses Russian components, in, example, the PL-12 and infact still purchases Russian equipment, example, anti submarine helicopters.




Pakchina said:


> Russia can no more mass produce heavy military hardware and moreover lack of reliability, service [/B]etc while China is a bigger economy and its industrial and technological capacities have long surpassed Russia's own capacities. Russia is dependent on natural resources for its survival.





Yet Russia still produces 'heavy military hardware' unless submarines, ships, and tanks are light? Are they? And funny you mention reliability and service, the most complex military systems are generally regarded as aircraft engines, since when did China produce more reliable aircraft engines?




Pakchina said:


> the SU 35 is still a prototype [/B]



Wrong, again.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Huan

A possible dispute with Russia would be over the occupation of China's Outer Manchuria since the period of unequal treaties.


----------



## Chinese Century

russian tech is pretty primitive. china has surpassed russian technology in 90% of weapons.


----------



## below_freezing

But not in nuclear weapons. That's why no one talks sh*t about Russia but foreigners living in China talk sh*t about China. Only nukes bring peace.


----------



## Speeder 2

nah...

Russia to deploy ptldM3 inside a re-education camp near China.


----------



## peaceful

REEVER said:


> If your tech is so good why hack a pentagon network to see f 35 blueprint to help with j20
> 
> If the tech is so amazing why make the j 11 a blatant copy if the sukhoi
> 
> If your tech is so good why use us tech in the form of isreali Protoype to build the j 10
> 
> Why is your ws-10 a rip off GE engine
> 
> 
> 
> Why?


 
because our tech is not that good. we want to learn something from us and russia. 

india paying huge price to get the cut down version, after decades, they are still doing that. 
we say, we want your stuff, but we don't want to pay, we lend you some money, you build it, and then we copy it. 

that is how it works. 

happier now?


----------



## Akasa

peaceful said:


> because our tech is not that good. we want to learn something from us and russia.
> 
> india paying huge price to get the cut down version, after decades, they are still doing that.
> we say, we want your stuff, but we don't want to pay, we lend you some money, you build it, and then we copy it.
> 
> that is how it works.
> 
> happier now?


 
US, maybe, but not much Russia anymore.

The main things we need to improve on are engines for aircraft.

China's bulk "copying" age ended in the late 1970s. Pretty much all equipment in PLA are indigenous now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

Chinese Century said:


> russian tech is pretty primitive. china has surpassed russian technology in 90% of weapons.


 
Here are the areas that the Chinese are probably ahead of the Russians:
- Armored Vehicles
- Artillery
- Guided missiles
- Surface ships
- Laser weapons
- Small arms
- UAVs
- Ballistic missiles
- ASAT/ABM missiles

Here are the areas that the Russians are probably still ahead of the Chinese:
- Nuclear submarines
- Bomber aircraft
- Transport aircraft
- Aircraft engines
- Surface-to-air missiles

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

below_freezing said:


> But not in nuclear weapons. That's why no one talks sh*t about Russia but foreigners living in China talk sh*t about China. Only nukes bring peace.


 
China has at least 3500 nukes, which is enough to vaporize any nation in the World.

But the problem is that the Chinese government acts very soft in its diplomacy, even the North Koreans can act very tough since they have nothing to lose unlike China.


----------



## ptldM3

Chinese Century said:


> russian tech is pretty primitive. china has surpassed russian technology in 90% of weapons.


 
When I see statements such as China has surpassed or China will surpass I can't help but shake my head; mostly because civilian fan boys are overwhelmed when I ask them to back up their claims with technical and reliable details. The problem is most of everything about a weapon or weapons system is classified, besides very general specifications. weapons technology could be everything from sonar&#8217;s, jammers, aircraft engines, and seekers to mission computers, than comes the entire weapon, a weapon can be everything from a submarine which has thousands of weapons systems to an aircraft which is also made up of many systems. For example, a radar is a complex weapons system, resolution, ground mapping, range, jamming countermeasure, side lobes, and data-link capability are just some features of a radar. Besides basic specifications such as range and side lobes there is not much revealed about radars, this especially hold true for China, since very little is know about Chinese weapons.

To some it up your 90% figure is ridiculous, unless of course you can verify it to be true. If so go ahead and pull up technical details to back up your claim. And please do take your time because you'll need an equivalent of a library full of literature to fully cover the broad and I put an emphasis on broad range of weapons systems and subsystems, which number in the thousands.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## akinkhoo

SinoSoldier said:


> Here are the areas that the Chinese are probably ahead of the Russians:
> - Armored Vehicles
> - Artillery
> - Guided missiles
> - Surface ships
> - Laser weapons
> - Small arms
> - UAVs
> - Ballistic missiles
> - ASAT/ABM missiles
> 
> Here are the areas that the Russians are probably still ahead of the Chinese:
> - Nuclear submarines
> - Bomber aircraft
> - Transport aircraft
> - Aircraft engines
> - Surface-to-air missiles


 i would actually rate russia's
- Ballistic missiles
- ASAT/ABM missiles
above that of China's


----------



## below_freezing

ptldM3 said:


> When I see statements such as China has surpassed or China will surpass I can't help but shake my head; mostly because civilian fan boys are overwhelmed when I ask them to back up their claims with technical and reliable details. The problem is most of everything about a weapon or weapons system is classified, besides very general specifications. weapons technology could be everything from sonar&#8217;s, jammers, aircraft engines, and seekers to mission computers, than comes the entire weapon, a weapon can be everything from a submarine which has thousands of weapons systems to an aircraft which is also made up of many systems. For example, a radar is a complex weapons system, resolution, ground mapping, range, jamming countermeasure, side lobes, and data-link capability are just some features of a radar. Besides basic specifications such as range and side lobes there is not much revealed about radars, this especially hold true for China, since very little is know about Chinese weapons.
> 
> To some it up your 90% figure is ridiculous, unless of course you can verify it to be true. If so go ahead and pull up technical details to back up your claim. And please do take your time because you'll need an equivalent of a library full of literature to fully cover the broad and I put an emphasis on broad range of weapons systems and subsystems, which number in the thousands.



I'd just like to make some simple extrapolations. Radar systems are a measure of the electronics making capabilities of a country. There are 3 mainland Chinese and 4 Taiwan companies in the top 18 semiconductor foundries. There are 0 in Russia. There are 0 Russian IDMs in the top 20.

Chemical and steel production are major factors in shipbuilding. China manufactures 40% of the world's steel, 60% of the world's chemical fibers, and has 2 top 10 chemical companies. Russia has 0 top 10 chemical companies.

Scientific publications are another measure of technical skill. China beats Russia in both citations per paper and in absolute number.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Malik Usman

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Are you Indian or Pakistani? You keep changing your flags


 
If he is putting comments against China and Pakistan...........Then surely he is Indian............as mostly Indians are here to make propoganda agains Pakistan.


----------



## Ammyy

Chinese Century said:


> russian tech is pretty primitive. china has surpassed russian technology in 90% of weapons.


 
tell me any one weapon is which China is ahead of Russia or I will tell all the items in China is still far behind Russia 

To start with S400 (China made copy of it), Russian Engine even in their J20


----------



## SR 71 Blackbird

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> China has at least 3500 nukes, which is enough to vaporize any nation in the World.
> 
> But the problem is that the Chinese government acts very soft in its diplomacy, even the North Koreans can act very tough since they have nothing to lose unlike China.


 
China 3500 nukes??
Well then 
US:50000nukes
Russia:56000nukes
France:5000nukes
UK:3200nukes
Pakistan:2500-3000nukes
India:2200-2700nukes.


----------



## SR 71 Blackbird

below_freezing said:


> I'd just like to make some simple extrapolations. Radar systems are a measure of the electronics making capabilities of a country. There are 3 mainland Chinese and 4 Taiwan companies in the top 18 semiconductor foundries. There are 0 in Russia. There are 0 Russian IDMs in the top 20.
> 
> Chemical and steel production are major factors in shipbuilding. China manufactures 40% of the world's steel, 60% of the world's chemical fibers, and has 2 top 10 chemical companies. Russia has 0 top 10 chemical companies.
> 
> Scientific publications are another measure of technical skill. China beats Russia in both citations per paper and in absolute number.



Yes but that doesn't mean Chinese military tech>Russian military tech.


----------



## Paan Singh

SR 71 Blackbird said:


> China 3500 nukes??
> Well then
> US:50000nukes
> Russia:56000nukes
> France:5000nukes
> UK:3200nukes
> Pakistan:2500-3000nukes
> India:2200-2700nukes.


 
even i have 3 nukes under my bed and 1 in pocket


----------



## peaceful

SR 71 Blackbird said:


> China 3500 nukes??
> Well then
> US:50000nukes
> Russia:56000nukes
> France:5000nukes
> UK:3200nukes
> Pakistan:2500-3000nukes
> India:2200-2700nukes.



india doesn't have any reliable nuke or its delivery system.


----------



## IndianArmy

peaceful said:


> india doesn't have any reliable nuke or its delivery system.


 
Pray hard, who knows!! your wish might come true....


----------



## SR 71 Blackbird

peaceful said:


> india doesn't have any reliable nuke or its delivery system.


 Good,when AGNI V will strike Beijing you can pin blame on some other country.No retaliatory strike against China as India doesn't have any reliable nuke or its delivery system.


----------



## below_freezing

SR 71 Blackbird said:


> China 3500 nukes??
> Well then
> US:50000nukes
> Russia:56000nukes
> France:5000nukes
> UK:3200nukes
> Pakistan:2500-3000nukes
> India:2200-2700nukes.


 
Yes, just like "Israel has no nukes".

A mature nuclear power that made the H-bomb before france "has 250 nukes". Yeah. And this nuclear power also has people calling for the complete genocide of its citizens with enemy nations actively moving towards the goal of this genocide. Yeah. We only have "250 nukes". 

Just a question: if we can make 250 what stops us from making 500?


----------



## peaceful

IndianArmy said:


> Pray hard, who knows!! your wish might come true....


 
you want to show me an indian missile fitted with nuke warhead? 

please.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## peaceful

SR 71 Blackbird said:


> Good,when AGNI V will strike Beijing you can pin blame on some other country.No retaliatory strike against China as India doesn't have any reliable nuke or its delivery system.



1. we have mid course anti missile system. your AGNI joke need to prey pretty hard so it can research Wuhan. 
2. india doesn't have any single operational AGNI V. *be honest, you don't have it. it is still on paper. *
3. when such launch is detected, our CJ-10 carrying nuke warhead can reach new delhi faster. *because your land size is tiny*.


----------



## Whiplash

peaceful said:


> you want to show me an indian missile fitted with nuke warhead?
> 
> please.


 
Yeah.. How do you distinguish eh? Does a nuke warhead have 'NUKE' written on it with a sketch pen?


----------



## Whiplash

peaceful said:


> 1. we have mid course anti missile system. your AGNI joke need to prey pretty hard so it can research Wuhan.
> 2. india doesn't have any single operational AGNI V. *be honest, you don't have it. it is still on paper. *
> 3. when such launch is detected, our CJ-10 carrying nuke warhead can reach new delhi faster. *because your land size is tiny*.


 
Does the all mighty master peaceful know cruise missiles can be intercepted by SAMs? You can about your ABM but we wouldn't need one for a CJ 10


----------



## peaceful

below_freezing said:


> Yes, just like "Israel has no nukes".
> 
> A mature nuclear power that made the H-bomb before france "has 250 nukes". Yeah. And this nuclear power also has people calling for the complete genocide of its citizens with enemy nations actively moving towards the goal of this genocide. Yeah. We only have "250 nukes".
> 
> Just a question: if we can make 250 what stops us from making 500?


 
india did 3 tests in 1998, more in 1999. none of them was considered as a successful h-bomb test. all failed. 
as already been pointed, as a nation, india is not smart enough to figure out how everything works. 

now here is the bad news: you can't test any more, the international reaction would be too bad, so india will never be able to prove it.


----------



## peaceful

Whiplash said:


> Does the all mighty master peaceful know cruise missiles can be intercepted by SAMs? You can about your ABM but we wouldn't need one for a CJ 10


 
you are basically fooling yourself. 

when its comes to nuke, I mean when our CJ-10 fitted with nuke warhead are on it way to new delhi and mumbai, do you seriously believe your SAM can shoot down all of them? we have 1000 CJ-10, FFS. 

please learn statistics/probability first.


----------



## peaceful

Whiplash said:


> Does the all mighty master peaceful know cruise missiles can be intercepted by SAMs? You can about your ABM but we wouldn't need one for a CJ 10



please also understand, the ABM being mentioned here is not your indian joke. it is a kkv device doing mid course interception. so far, two nations have demonstrated such ability: US and China. 

sorry, you can't import such weapon from your friends Russia, they don't have it. you can't get it from the US as you are just America's dog, not true ally.


----------



## ares

peaceful said:


> india did 3 tests in 1998, more in 1999. none of them was considered as a successful h-bomb test. all failed.
> as already been pointed, as a nation, india is not smart enough to figure out how everything works.
> 
> now here is the bad news: you can't test any more, the international reaction would be too bad, so india will never be able to prove it.


 
*You should do some back ground reading before you go about making a fool out yourself*..even Wikipedia will do.

Pokhran-II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Whiplash

peaceful said:


> you are basically fooling yourself.
> 
> when its comes to nuke, I mean when our CJ-10 fitted with nuke warhead are on it way to new delhi and mumbai, do you seriously believe your SAM can shoot down all of them? we have 1000 CJ-10, FFS.
> 
> please learn statistics/probability first.



I'm pretty sure I know my math better than you. China doesn't have a 1000 nukes for one. China doesn't even have a lot of nukes fitted on CJ 10s ready for launch. A 100. TOPS. Go learn some geography. A CJ 10 could never hit mumbai. 
And are you demented? You say you can shoot down every AGNI we launch. But we can't shoot down your CRUISE missiles?


----------



## Hafizzz

tanlixiang28776 said:


> Are you Indian or Pakistani? You keep changing your flags


 
One thing for sure - He is an anti-China TROLL !!!


----------



## Bigoren

SinoSoldier said:


> Yes, you can fit 10 pilots in the single seat cockpit.



You make my day.


----------



## Whiplash

peaceful said:


> please also understand, the ABM being mentioned here is not your indian joke. it is a kkv device doing mid course interception. so far, two nations have demonstrated such ability: US and China.
> 
> sorry, you can't import such weapon from your friends Russia, they don't have it. you can't get it from the US as *you are just America's dog*, not true ally.


 
Is that what your government funded, highly unbiased and absolutely free to speak newspapers told you? Whatever we do, whatever the consequences, we do as free men. That pathetic excuse of a life you have going can never really understand that. And seriously.. Are you like a janitor? All you do is come on to this foru and bjtch about china's superiority. Go out. Get laid.


----------



## Bigoren

Whiplash said:


> Is that what your government funded, highly unbiased and absolutely free to speak newspapers told you? Whatever we do, whatever the consequences, we do as free men. That pathetic excuse of a life you have going can never really understand that. And seriously.. Are you like a janitor? All you do is come on to this foru and bjtch about china's superiority. Go out. Get laid.


 
LALALA,indian like to bring the democracy issue when they run out of idea to debate with creditable reason/prove.


----------



## Whiplash

Bigoren said:


> LALALA,indian like to bring the democracy issue when they run out of idea to debate with creditable reason/prove.


 
And chinese like to randomly call us American dogs?


----------



## Bigoren

Whiplash said:


> And chinese like to randomly call us American dogs?


 
Just report it if you feel insult.Thats all.


----------



## IndianArmy

peaceful said:


> you want to show me an indian missile fitted with nuke warhead?
> 
> please.


 
You will not live to see If we show you that....


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

SR 71 Blackbird said:


> China 3500 nukes??
> Well then
> US:50000nukes
> Russia:56000nukes
> France:5000nukes
> UK:3200nukes
> Pakistan:2500-3000nukes
> India:2200-2700nukes.


 
Bro, you like to quote the Western source, aren't you? If you accept the 250 figure from the West, then you have to spontaneously take this as well.

1. Russia ~ 1,273 megaton
2. USA ~ 570 megaton
3. China ~ 294 megaton
4. France ~ 55 megaton
5. UK ~ 16 megaton
6. Israel ~ 1.5 - 4 megaton
7. India ~ 0.8 - 1 megaton
8. Pakistan ~ 0.6 - 1 megaton
9. North Korea ~ Unknown

NTI: Nuclear Disarmament


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

DRDO said:


> tell me any one weapon is which China is ahead of Russia or I will tell all the items in China is still far behind Russia
> 
> To start with S400 (China made copy of it), Russian Engine even in their J20


 
S400 was a joint development, now we have better SAM than S400. Russia hasn't conducted any midcourse interception yet.

And J-20 is powered by indigenous engine, all J-11B/BS are powered by indigenous engine now.


----------



## ares

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Bro, you like to quote the Western source, aren't you? If you accept the 250 figure from the West, then you have to spontaneously take this as well.
> 
> 1. Russia ~ 1,273 megaton
> 2. USA ~ 570 megaton
> 3. China ~ 294 megaton
> 4. France ~ 55 megaton
> 5. UK ~ 16 megaton
> 6. Israel ~ 1.5 - 4 megaton
> 7. India ~ 0.8 - 1 megaton
> 8. Pakistan ~ 0.6 - 1 megaton
> 9. North Korea ~ Unknown
> 
> NTI: Nuclear Disarmament


 

That would have been true..had it been 2005 ..but this 2011.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ares said:


> That would have been true..had it been 2005 ..but this 2011.


 
I am sure that India has increased a lot of its nuclear firepower by now, but according to your fellow Indian poster, only China's stockpile permanently remains at 250?


----------



## ares

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I am sure that India has increaed a lot of its nuclear firepower by now, but according to your fellow Indian poster, only China's stockpile permanently remains at 250?


 
Question is, Is his source updated?..If you have an updated,* neutral *source, saying that China has 3200 nuclear weapons ..I will belive you.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ares said:


> Question is, Is his source updated?..If you have an updated,* neutral *source, saying that China has 3200 nuclear weapons ..I will belive you.


 
Sure, there is other source that estimates China has 2350 nukes decade ago. 

Environmentalists Against War


----------



## ares

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Sure, there is other source that estimates China has 2350 nukes decade ago.
> 
> Environmentalists Against War


 
Look I don't wan't sound as spoil sport but this might be a propganda link.

Cause 
1) It is an antiwar website..they just might have exaggerated stuff ..to make China seem a Bogeyman.
2) The article is from 2005 which is further referring to a *'confusing'* document printed in 1990s ..that at that time Chines nuclear arsenal was 2350!!
Don't you have reliable/reputable source such as FAS.org etc backing your claim?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ares said:


> Look I don't wan't sound as spoil sport but this might be a propganda link.
> 
> Cause
> 1) It is an antiwar website..they just might have exaggerated stuff ..to make China seem a Bogeyman.
> 2) The article is from 2005 which is further referring to a *'confusing'* document printed in 1990s ..that at that time Chines nuclear arsenal was 2350 at that time.
> Don't you have reliable/reputable source such as FAS.org etc backing your claim?


 
The website is not the first hand source, but it was from a Hong Kong military magazine.

Anyway, just accept that China's nuclear firepower is 300 times more powerful than India's if you don't want to believe any Non-Western source information.


----------



## ares

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The website is not the first hand source, but it was from a Hong Kong military magazine.
> 
> Anyway, just accept that China's nuclear firepower is 300 times more powerful than India's if you don't want to believe any Non-Western source information.


 
I would, were it if 2005.. were it to maintain its 2005 position then China should have been producing nuclear weapons at 300 times faster rate than India's these last six years...Is that true?


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ares said:


> I would, were it if 2005.. were it to maintain its 2005 position then China should have been producing nuclear weapons at 300 times faster rate than India's these last six years...Is that true?


 
I may also ask you for any updated source that claims India's nuclear firepower isn't 1/300 of China's. 

Many Indian posters love to quote the source from the Western Intelligence in order to belittle China, meanwhile you guys can't just accept the Western source to put China's nuclear firepower 300 times above India's. I just smell hypocrisy and double standard here.

And keep in mind that China is very mature to produce the megaton nuke, a Chinese megaton nuke is equivalent to 20-30 primitive Indian atomic bombs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ares

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I may also ask you for any updated source that claims India's nuclear firepower isn't 1/300 of China's.
> 
> Many Indian posters love to quote the source from the Western Intelligence in order to belittle China, meanwhile you guys can't just accept the Western source to put China's nuclear firepower 300 times above India's. I just smell hypocrisy and double standard here.
> 
> And keep in mind that China is very mature to produce the megaton nuke, a Chinese megaton nuke is equivalent to 20-30 primitive Indian atomic bombs.


 
You are the one with the point to prove here..all I am asking is that you present an updated neutral source to prove your point.
Besides India has decided to restrict the yield of its thermonuclear devices to 200 kilotones because that is the optimum fissile material vs yield ratio out there.
If you increase the yield of a thermonuclear device beyond 200 kilo tone the destruction causes by this extra yield is significantly less than by that intial 200 kilo tones..It is much more economical(fissile material wise) and causes more destruction to use 5 MIRV 200 kilotone warheads than a single consolidated megaton warhead.

And India has plenty of thermonuclear devices.

Use plural, India has thermonuclear bombs: Kakodkar - India News - IBNLive


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ares said:


> You are the one with the point to prove here..all I am asking is that you present an updated neutral source to prove your point.
> Besides India has decided to restrict the yield of its thermonuclear devices to 200 kilotones because that is the optimum fissile material vs yield ratio out there.
> If you increase the yield of a thermonuclear device beyond 200 kilo tone the destruction causes by this extra yield is significantly less than by that intial 200 kilo tones..It is much more economical(fissile material wise) and causes more destruction to use 5 MIRV 200 kilotone warheads than a single consolidated megaton warhead.
> 
> And India has plenty of thermonuclear devices.
> 
> Use plural, India has thermonuclear bombs: Kakodkar - India News - IBNLive


 
What is the weight of your thermonuclear bomb? Is there any available ballistic missile to carry it?

An one megaton Chinese warhead only weighs 700kg, thus we can use our DF-31A/B and DF-41 to deliver it at any corner in the World.

Your 200kt warhead may not be operational yet. And may i ask for the source about Indian MIRV technology?


----------



## gaurish

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I may also ask you for any updated source that claims India's nuclear firepower isn't 1/300 of China's.
> 
> Many Indian posters love to quote the source from the Western Intelligence in order to belittle China, meanwhile you guys can't just accept the Western source to put China's nuclear firepower 300 times above India's. I just smell hypocrisy and double standard here.
> 
> And keep in mind that China is very mature to produce the megaton nuke, a Chinese megaton nuke is equivalent to 20-30 primitive Indian atomic bombs.


 
Then why dont u blow us up???????


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

gaurish said:


> Then why dont u blow us up???????


 
Do you think the NFU policy is just a joke?

US has never promised any NFU policy, yet they don't have the gut to use it against China.


----------



## ares

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> What is the weight of your thermonuclear bomb? Is there any available ballistic missile to carry it?
> 
> An one megaton Chinese warhead only weighs 700kg, thus we can use our DF-31A/B and DF-41 to deliver it at any corner in the World.



No it not the weight but the yield..*destruction caused by five independent 200 kiltone MIRV warheads is much more than a single consolidated Megaton warhead..though they might be using same amount of fissile material.

*


ChineseTiger1986 said:


> *Your 200kt warhead may not be operational yet.* And may i ask for the source about Indian MIRV technology?



On what basis do you say that? 

India's developing mutliple-warhead missile : LATEST HEADLINES: India Today
MIRV config is earmarked for Agni 5.
What makes 5000 km range Agni-5 missile deadlier - Rediff.com India News


----------



## anon45

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Do you think the NFU policy is just a joke?
> 
> US has never promised any NFU policy, yet they don't have the gut to use it against China.


 
So if we're not using nuclear weapons against China we clearly don't have the 'gut' to use them against China? Solid logic there.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

anon45 said:


> So if we're not using nuclear weapons against China we clearly don't have the 'gut' to use them against China? Solid logic there.


 
I don't think you guys have the gut to 'first use' it against us, neither is China.

But China won't hesitate to deliver all its stockpile if it got nuked first, then same for US.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ares said:


> No it not the weight but the yield..*destruction caused by five independent 200 kiltone MIRV warheads is much more than a single consolidated Megaton warhead..though they might be using same amount of fissile material.
> 
> *
> 
> 
> On what basis do you say that?
> 
> India's developing mutliple-warhead missile : LATEST HEADLINES: India Today
> MIRV config is earmarked for Agni 5.
> What makes 5000 km range Agni-5 missile deadlier - Rediff.com India News


 
The problem is, can your ballistic missile have enough payload to handle five 200kt warheads spontaneously?

Do you have any MIRV technology yet?

Is Agni 5 ready to be operational?

How about Agni 2 from the December of last year?


----------



## ares

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The problem is, can your ballistic missile has enough payload to handle five 200kt warheads spontaneously?
> 
> Do you have any MIRV technology yet?
> 
> Is Agni 5 ready to be operational?
> 
> How about Agni 2 from the Demember of last year?
> 
> [video]http://youtu.be/86FGO12q2p0[/video]


 
Why do you think they won't..a missile having a payload of 1.5 tonnes that can carry upto 10 MIRV warheads won't be able to carry more fire power that lets say a 700 kg consolidated megaton device. 

And what about Agni 2?

PS : Not all cities need 1 megaton yield to destroy them.


----------



## ptldM3

below_freezing said:


> I'd just like to make some simple extrapolations. Radar systems are a measure of the electronics making capabilities of a country. There are 3 mainland Chinese and 4 Taiwan companies in the top 18 semiconductor foundries. There are 0 in Russia. There are 0 Russian IDMs in the top 20.




 is that why Phazatron helped China develop a radar? What about the recent anti submarine helicopters China purchased from Russia, why did they do that if China is so much more advanced in radar design? And care to explain why Russian electronic such as the seeker are in the PL-12?




below_freezing said:


> Chemical and steel production are major factors in shipbuilding. China manufactures 40% of the world's steel, 60% of the world's chemical fibers, and has 2 top 10 chemical companies. Russia has 0 top 10 chemical companies.




This is about as ridiculous as your IQ rants. Firstly I used to work for a company that produced large ships; secondly, Russia manufactures more steel than the United States, but what does this mean? It means absolutely nothing, since the United States is the leader in ship building. You don't need to be a leading steel producer to manufacture ships--is the Philippines a large steel producer? I think not, are they are large ship builder?--they are.

Just about every country has enough steel to manufacture its own ships and if there is a lack of steel it can always be imported.

As for having top chemical companies and relating it to ship building, this is also absurd. Most ships are built using steel, sometimes composites are used which is usually simple hydrex resins and composite fibers which are produced in most industrial nations. 

What is needed is a shipyard, funding and a team of engineers.




below_freezing said:


> Scientific publications are another measure of technical skill. China beats Russia in both citations per paper and in absolute number.



Yet China still struggles to make aircraft engines which are based off of everything from metallurgy to engineering and electronics. I would also not get to excited about scientific publications, most of the junk published is 99% unrelated to military developments, by this I mean everything from condoms to toothpaste and anxiety counseling makes it into scientific publications .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ares said:


> No it not the weight but the yield..*destruction caused by five independent 200 kiltone MIRV warheads is much more than a single consolidated Megaton warhead..though they might be using same amount of fissile material.
> 
> *
> 
> 
> On what basis do you say that?
> 
> India's developing mutliple-warhead missile : LATEST HEADLINES: India Today
> MIRV config is earmarked for Agni 5.
> What makes 5000 km range Agni-5 missile deadlier - Rediff.com India News


 


ares said:


> Why do you think they won't..a missile having a payload of 1.5 tonnes that can carry upto 10 MIRV warheads won't be able to carry more fire power that lets say a 700 kg consolidated megaton device.
> 
> And what about Agni 2?


 
The payload of DF-31 is between 1050-1750kg.

MissileThreat :: CSS-9 (DF-31/DF-31A)

So that means a DF-31A can carry up to two megaton warheads with a range cover up to 14000km.

And i doubt you can make a 200kt only at 150kg, this is impossible for the nuclear miniaturization technology of India.

Check US's most advanced warhead W88 of Mark 5.

Yield: 475tk
Weight: 350kg

And China's DF-31/41 warhead

Yield: 1000kt
Weight: 700kg

India has just made a primitive 200kt thermonuclear bomb less than 1 year, and immediately it reaches both US and China's level of nuclear miniaturization?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ares

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The payload of DF-31 is between 1050-1750kg.
> 
> MissileThreat :: CSS-9 (DF-31/DF-31A)
> 
> So that means a DF-31A can carry up to two megaton warheads with a range cover up to 14000km.
> 
> And i doubt you can make a 200kt only at 150kg, this is impossible for the nuclear miniaturization technology of India.
> 
> Check US's most advanced warhead W88 of Mark 5.
> 
> Yield: 475tk
> Weight: 350kg
> 
> And China's DF-31/41 warhead
> 
> Yield: 1000kt
> Weight: 700kg
> 
> India has just made a primitive 200kt thermonuclear bomb less than 1 year, and immediately it reaches both US and China's level of nuclear miniaturization?



Again your comparison is futile because of the reason I have already explained that destructive power of a consolidated device is lesser than destructive power of a independent smaller devices.

Then again Soviet Union tested a 50 Megaton device..but it is waste of resources..because cities can be completely destroyed is much lesser yield.

India did not just make thermo nuclear device..but it tested one in 1998.It is all in the link I gave you.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ares said:


> Again your comparison is futile because of the reason I have already explained that destructive power of a consolidated device is lesser than destructive power of a independent smaller devices.
> 
> Then again Soviet Union tested a 50 Megaton device..but it is waste of resources..because cities can be completely destroyed is much lesser yield.
> 
> India did not just make thermo nuclear device..but it tested one in 1998.It is all in the link I gave you.



Same information quoted from the US strategic defence, since you guys consider the US source as the most reliable one.

DF-31 and DF-31A

MissileThreat :: CSS-9 (DF-31/DF-31A)

Agni 4/5

MissileThreat :: Agni-4/5

What made you think that India has better launch device and warhead than China?


Not even Agni 3 is operational, yet you start to talk how India's ballistic missile is superior to China's?

MissileThreat :: Agni-3


----------



## ares

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Same information quoted from the US strategic defence, since you guys consider the US source the most reliable.
> 
> DF-31 and DF-31A
> 
> MissileThreat :: CSS-9 (DF-31/DF-31A)
> 
> Agni 4/5
> 
> MissileThreat :: Agni-4/5
> 
> What made you think that India has better launch device and warhead than China?
> 
> 
> Not even Agni 3 is operational, yet you start to talk how India's ballistic missile is superior to China's?
> 
> MissileThreat :: Agni-3


 
Again you are mincing words ..I made no such claim..you are just assuming them.

Agni 3 clears test, all set to be inducted into forces


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ares said:


> Again you are mincing words ..I made no such claim..you are just assuming them.
> 
> Agni 3 clears test, all set to be inducted into forces


 
Yet not even Agni 2 is reliable enough to be operational.


----------



## ares

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Yet not even Agni 2 is reliable enough to be operational.


 
Like you would know about reliability of your missiles hunh..does your govt even disclose when its tests the missiles or when it is successful or has even failed?


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ares said:


> Like you would know about reliability of your missiles hunh..does your govt even disclose when its tests the missiles or when it is successful or has even failed?


 
Our missiles have been tested continuously, we directly put a brigade of DF-31A into the military parade two years ago.

With DF-31A into mass production and the primitive version of DF-31 being gradually phased out, does India have the same confidence with its Agni 2?

Does Agni 2 go into mass production?


----------



## ares

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Our missiles have been tested continuously, we directly put a brigade of DF-31A into the military parade two years ago.
> 
> With DF-31A into mass production and the primitive version of DF-31 being gradually phased out, does India have the same confidence with its Agni 2?
> 
> Does Agni 2 go into mass production?



Agni 2 has gone into serial production long time back..Multiple missile brigades have been created in the army for Agni 2 ..but that was not my question.


----------



## rcrmj

ares said:


> Like you would know about reliability of your missiles hunh..does your govt even disclose when its tests the missiles or when it is successful or has even failed?


 
u.s and russ stats are all over the space, they are more than happy to 'unviel' those failed launches, but unfortunately Chinese rocket launches share the most successful rate as others sadly not india`

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ares

rcrmj said:


> u.s and russ stats are all over the space, they are more than happy to 'unviel' those failed launches, but unfortunately Chinese rocket launches share the most successful rate as others sadly not india`


 
So you are saying, you would rely on western sources to judge the reliability of your missiles?..because before this argument was hinging around the point why western claims of Chinese nuclear arsenal are not reliable.

Then again why are you so certain that they will point out your failures ..after all Chinese argument has always been that west wants to paint China as the bogeyman to fuel its own defense?


----------



## rcrmj

ares said:


> So you are saying, you would rely on western sources to judge the reliability of your missiles?..because before this argument was hinging around the point why western claims of Chinese nuclear arsenal are not reliable.


i never said that`i can see where u r going, besides i dont see u r capable to understand the idea of that nuclear arsenals are consist of the carrier (missile) and the nuclear warhead.. so its rather vague to say chinese nuclear arsenal are not reliable, because u hv to spesify whether is the carrier has the reliability issue or the warhead? 



> Then again why are you so certain that they will point out your failures ..after all Chinese argument has always been that west wants to paint China as the bogeyman to fuel its own defense?


 
again u mixed the ideas of the china-threat, and the cold-war china bash mentality``western medias are always in the forefrond to dig anything that will boost their paper sell``india inherited it...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ares

rcrmj said:


> i never said that`i can see where u r going, besides i dont see u r capable to understand the idea of that nuclear arsenals are consist of the carrier (missile) and the nuclear warhead.. so its rather vague to say chinese nuclear arsenal are not reliable, because u hv to spesify whether is the carrier has the reliability issue or the warhead?



Read properly and comprehend what I am saying..I am not doubting the reliability of your warheads but the reliability of the claim that China has 2300 nuclear weapons ..as opposed to claims by western sources..which infact was the point of discussion before you came in.



rcrmj said:


> again u mixed the ideas of the china-threat, and the cold-war china bash mentality``western medias are always in the forefrond to dig anything that will boost their paper sell``india inherited it...


 
My question again ..why do you think westren media will point out your failures..when even your govt does not.?


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ares said:


> Read properly and comprehend what I am saying..I am not doubting the reliability of your warheads but the reliability of the claim that China has 2300 nuclear weapons ..as opposed to claims by western sources..which infact was the point of discussion before you came in.
> 
> 
> 
> My question again ..why do you think westren media will point out your failures..when even your govt does not.?


 
Yeah, but show me the reliable source that point out any Indian BM with 5-10 MIRVs. Otherwise, don't ever make up the stuff out of the thin air.


----------



## ptldM3

rcrmj said:


> *u.s and russ stats are all over the space*, they are more than happy to 'unviel' those failed launches, but unfortunately *Chinese rocket launches share the most successful rate *as others sadly not india`



Big crock, China has launched about 1% of what the US and Russia has launched, Russia has launched around 3000 rockets while China has several hundred launches, less launches means statistically you will have less failures. But overall China has had some of the largest failure rates per launch than any other country. While Russia has had the most successful launch rate. From 1957 to 1999 China had 83% success rate per launch--Russia 93% success rate, and the US had an 87% success rate. 

Facts and statistics don&#8217;t lie, but you do.


----------



## ares

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Yeah, but show me the reliable source that point out any Indian BM with 5-10 MIRVs. Otherwise, don't ever make up the stuff out of the thin air.


 
But I did give you the link for Agni 5.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ares said:


> But I did give you the link for Agni 5.


 
But Agni 5 isn't operational yet according to the US strategic defence.

Otherwise, i could show you DF-41 with 10-12 MIRVs which has been confirmed as opertional by many Chinese sources, but the US strategic defence hasn't confirmed yet.

If you only trust the West, then follow their rule, just don't make up your own rule.


----------



## faithfulguy

When I look at the topic and the browse through the discussion in the last three pages, there is not a post about Russia's deploy Su-35 along the Chinese border. We should have a permanent India vs China thread that is link to both India and China site and any urge to compare India and China should be done in that thread. Leave other threads alone.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

faithfulguy said:


> When I look at the topic and the browse through the discussion in the last three pages, there is not a post about Russia's deploy Su-35 along the Chinese border. We should have a permanent India vs China thread that is link to both India and China site and any urge to compare India and China should be done in that thread. Leave other threads alone.


 
This topic itself was pointless, why Russia has to do anything against China? Our border conflict has already been resolved more than a decade ago.

China doesn't have any Anti-Russia movement nor our government supports any separatist movement within Russia.

Russia is not our friend, but we are not enemy either at least for now.


----------



## ares

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> But Agni 5 isn't operational yet according to the US strategic defence.
> 
> Otherwise, i could show you DF-41 with 10-12 MIRVs which has been confirmed as opertional by many Chinese sources, but the US strategic defence hasn't confirmed yet.
> 
> If you only trust the West, then follow their rule, just don't make up your own rule.


 
When did I say Agni 5 is operational..they are going to test this yr itself.


----------



## Huan

It was because of Russia that China lost Outer Mongolia and Outer Manchuria in the first place. That could be the remaining reason for confrontation with Russia in the future.


----------



## faithfulguy

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> This threat itself was pointless, why Russia has to do anything against China? Our border conflict has already been resolved more than a decade ago.
> 
> China doesn't have any Anti-Russia movement nor our government supports any separatist movement within Russia.
> 
> Russia is not our friend, but we are not enemy either at least for now.



I'm puzzled by a 23 page of responses when the title itself should not warrant 23 responses. As usual, it turn out to be another China vs India thread.

---------- Post added at 01:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:49 PM ----------




Huan said:


> It was because of Russia that China lost Outer Mongolia and Outer Manchuria in the first place. That could be the remaining reason for confrontation with Russia in the future.


 
so would China try to absorb outer Mongolia?


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Outer Mongolia can be our buffer zone, but it may be a permanent territorial loss since KMT conceded their independence.


----------



## faithfulguy

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Outer Mongolia can be our buffer zone, but it may be a permanent territorial loss since KMT conceded their independence.


 
KMT never conceded. CCP did. But KMT lost it without concession. In any case, Mongolia is a country recognize by most, even government of China. Try to absorb Mongolia is no different then talk about trying to absorb Serbia


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

faithfulguy said:


> KMT never conceded. CCP did. But KMT lost it without concession. In any case, Mongolia is a country recognize by most, even government of China. Try to absorb Mongolia is no different then talk about trying to absorb Serbia


 
KMT was the first one who conceded Outer Mongolia back in 1937. Chiang asked Stalin to offer help against the Japanese invasion, but Stalin just blackmailed Chiang to concede Outer Mongolia. Later, CCP also conceded Outer Mongolia because it was already an independent nation.

The independence of Outer Mongolia was primarily the fault of KMT, CCP was just pragmatic at that time since nothing can change it.


----------



## faithfulguy

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> KMT was the first one who conceded Outer Mongolia back in 1937. Chiang asked Stalin to offer help against the Japanese invasion, but Stalin just blackmailed Chiang to concede Outer Mongolia. Later, CCP also conceded Outer Mongolia because it was already an independent nation.
> 
> The independence of Outer Mongolia was primarily the fault of KMT, CCP was just pragmatic at that time since nothing can change it.


Mongolia declared independent in 1921, so Chiang was also conceding the fact. In any case, nothing can change it now.


----------



## rcrmj

ptldM3 said:


> Big crock, China has launched about 1% of what the US and Russia has launched, Russia has launched around 3000 rockets while China has several hundred launches, less launches means statistically you will have less failures. But overall China has had some of the largest failure rates per launch than any other country. While Russia has had the most successful launch rate. From 1957 to 1999 China had 83% success rate per launch--Russia 93% success rate, and the US had an 87% success rate.
> 
> Facts and statistics don&#8217;t lie, but you do.


 
ok``ok``russian is the best`pardon me that i didnt include russian into this most successful club!! america says it has the highest rate, russia says she is the one, india says india is the one, european think they are the best so does china``so u tell me who is being the 'one-upper' 8-years-old kid??

the 83%. 87% and 93% are very interesting care to show me the source, and also u better use the source from 1957 upto current date so i wont be a 'brat' afterwards`


----------



## faithfulguy

ares said:


> When did I say Agni 5 is operational..they are going to test this yr itself.


 
Why do many Indians, including you, like to compare things in the drawing board against inducted weapons of others?


----------



## ares

faithfulguy said:


> Why do many Indians, including you, like to compare things in the drawing board against inducted weapons of others?


 
I thought you did not want anymore derailment of thread, besides you should read the entire discussion to understand the context..It wasn't a comparison but a pointed reply to a specific question.


----------



## SpArK

faithfulguy said:


> Why do many Indians, including you, *like to compare things in the drawing board against inducted weapons of others*?


 
Everybody does that.. Just check the 5th gen fighter thread of urs for more clues.


----------



## applesauce

ptldM3 said:


> Big crock, China has launched about 1% of what the US and Russia has launched, Russia has launched around 3000 rockets while China has several hundred launches, less launches means statistically you will have less failures. But overall China has had some of the largest failure rates per launch than any other country. While Russia has had the most successful launch rate. From 1957 to 1999 China had 83% success rate per launch--Russia 93% success rate, and the US had an 87% success rate.
> 
> Facts and statistics don&#8217;t lie, but you do.


 
several hundred is not 1% of 3000(maybe 10% if 300), also less launches means less failures in absolute numbers not percentages


----------



## casual

i dont think this has anything to do with china. probably the fighters at the base was the oldest in the fleet and that's why it's being replaced first.


----------



## HROBOS

rcrmj said:


> ok``ok``russian is the best`pardon me that i didnt include russian into this most successful club!! america says it has the highest rate, russia says she is the one, india says india is the one, european think they are the best so does china``so u tell me who is being the 'one-upper' 8-years-old kid??
> 
> the 83%. 87% and 93% are very interesting care to show me the source, and also u better use the source from 1957 upto current date so i wont be a 'brat' afterwards`


 
In the first place, China? 
Surprise me more than anything.


----------



## PEACEMAKER2010

China hopes to acquire new Russian S-400 Triumph air defense system by 2015, but only the question of delivery of Su-35 fighters to this country is being discussed at the moment, Rossiyskaya Gazeta reports.

"The Chinese party has shown interest in acquisition of a number of Su-35 jets and submitted a proposal to us in 2011. At present this problem is being elaborated by the designated institution of Russia", - said the First Deputy Director General of Federal Service of Military-Technical Cooperation, Alexander Fomin.

Speaking of prospects of air defense systems deliveries to China, Fomin has reminded that during a period from 1993 to 2010 a large number of Russian air defense missile systems, including S-300PMU2 Favorit, have been delivered to China.

"As for further cooperation with China in the area of air defense, at present the Chinese partners are showing interest in acquisition of next-generation S-400 Triumph air defense systems. They want to acquire the first batch in 2015", - Fomin said.

According to Fomin, the prospects of deliveries of S-400 Triumph air defense systems to China may be defined in proportion to deliveries of these systems to the Russian armed forces.

"At present the construction of additional capacities for production of S-400 Triumph air defense systems is being carried out. China has not shown interest in acquisition of other Russian air defense systems yet", - Fomin said.

Russia will deliver Su-35 fighters and Triumph air defense systems to China

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Harry Potter

So PLAAF now wants Russian Su-35 fighters.
This means Chinese 4.5 gen fighter jet projects have failed.

Reactions: Like Like:
18


----------



## ManuZ

This really doesnt make any sense....
Why do the chinese need su 35sss???
They have multi ,medium fighter jets like j10 jf17s and all which they produced on their own and with collaboration....h 100
And according to them they all work fine and is in the league of the best fighters...
They have a defense industrial complex with 100billion $ budget...
can some chinese friends over here plz explain why they need su 35s???


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Next time, the fake news should be banned from this forum.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Federer

Recently They went to their feet for RD-33 Engines.

WS-10 Failed.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Federer said:


> Recently They went to their feet for RD-33 Engines.
> 
> WS-10 Failed.



WS-10 is a highthrust engine for larger aircrafts like J-11 and J-10, they are now using WS-13 to replace RD-93.

The poster like you simply don't bring up the debating quality of your fellow Indian members here.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## ManuZ

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Next time, the fake news should be banned from this forum.



Was that fake news??


----------



## majesticpankaj

It is fake or true but in both ways it is comical

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zabaniyah

ManuZ said:


> This really doesnt make any sense....
> Why do the chinese need su 35sss???
> They have multi ,medium fighter jets like j10 jf17s and all which they produced on their own and with collaboration....h 100
> And according to them they all work fine and is in the league of the best fighters...
> They have a defense industrial complex with 100billion $ budget...
> can some chinese friends over here plz explain why they need su 35s???



The J-10 and JF-17 are a light/medium category of fighters. 

The SU-35 is heavy and the most advanced stand alone platforms among all flankers. 



ManuZ said:


> Was that fake news??



Because it's a Russian source. Can't say the viability of the news.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## feilong

Can Indian people grow up with high IQ please, why post a BS news everywhere in all over the forum. GEEZ

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

I think S-400 will be a good seller in countries of Middle East and Southeast Asia, but China's EKV/MKV technology is decades ahead of this.

Saying China can't build the SAM like S-400 is simply saying like US can't build a frigate.

As for Su-35, it is just an upgraded Su-27, no thanks, it is not useful for us at all.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## lepziboy

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I think S-400 will be a good seller in countries of Middle East and Southeast Asia, but China's EKV/MKV technology is decades ahead of this.
> 
> Saying China can't build the SAM like S-400 is simply saying like US can't build a frigate.
> 
> As for Su-35, it is just an upgraded Su-27, no thanks, it is not useful for us at all.



Lol proof that EKV/MKV is decades ahead?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Secur

Federer said:


> Recently They went to their feet for RD-33 Engines.
> 
> *WS-10 Failed.*



Really ? So whats powering the J 10 B at the moment ? 

China wanted to expedite the delivery of JF 17 so a contract was signed for RD 33 despite the massive protest by a country

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

lepziboy said:


> Lol proof that EKV/MKV is decades ahead?



EKV/MKV can shoot down the travelling ICBM in the exoatmosphere with the pinpoint accuracy, while the SAM like S-400 is really slow compared to these, and it can only use to shoot down the slower travelling aircraft.

Only US/China possess the techonology to shoot down the ICBM, while Russia is lagging far behind of it.

However, China now even moves ahead of USA in term of EKV/MKV technology.

In 2007, China has successfully tested its EKV by shoot down a satellite with an altitude of 865km.

U.S. fears debris from China satellite-killing test to hit other satellites | Mail Online


In 2008, US has also tested its own by shooting down a satellite at an altitude of 210km.

U.S. to shoot down spy satellite | COSMOS magazine

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Black Widow

This is not welcome move, China must not be allowed the advance technology. Su35 must not be sold to china. 

I don what happen to russia, Chinese have stabbed there back by illegaly copying Su27, now they are considering chinese RFP for Su35, I am sure Chinese will again do the same... 

I suggest India buy Su35 and put diplomatic pressure.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Black Widow said:


> This is not welcome move, China must not be allowed the advance technology. Su35 must not be sold to china.
> 
> I don what happen to russia, Chinese have stabbed there back by illegaly copying Su27, now they are considering chinese RFP for Su35, I am sure Chinese will again do the same...
> 
> I suggest India buy Su35 and put diplomatic pressure.



What do you mean?

We will not buy these outdated stuffs anyway, and India can buy for all they want.


----------



## FairAndUnbiased

Isn't Su-35 a bomber platform anyways?

Also, S-400 is not that bad, the requirements for ballistic missile interception and aircraft interception are different. Its still better to use domestic systems though, even if they're inferior, but buying the S-400 can inspire us with some of its design tricks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

> Defying its tradition of keeping China at a distance of its advanced weapons, Russia has signaled its intent to sell its latest model of Su-35 jet fighter to China.
> 
> "We are ready to work with the Chinese partners in this direction," said Alexander Mikheyev, the deputy director of the Russian government export agency Rosoboronexport. His remarks came on the sidelines of China's ambitious Zhuhai Airshow 2010, staged at the Guangdong province and featuring a record number of companies exhibiting aircraft and aviation technology.
> 
> 
> 
> Powered by two 117S engines with thrust vectoring, the Su-35 Flanker E mixes high maneuverability with the capability of engaging several air targets at once, using both guided and unguided missiles and weapons systems. The multirole fighter is expected to roll off assembly lines by the end of the year, with the first batch set for China between 2010 and 2015. Local media have indicated that the order includes 48 aircraft.
> 
> 
> 
> Mikheyev told RIA-Novosti that Russia and China were engaged in the initial stages of talks and would discuss the "features of the export variant of the Su-35 and how to integrate it with previously supplied Su-30 fighters and the locally assembled Su-27." *Variants of the model have been offered to India, Malaysia, Algeria, Brazil and Venezuela since 2008. No deals though, have been signed.*
> 
> 
> Defense News quotes a Rosoboronexport official saying that the contract would "mark a departure from recent stagnation in Russian arms sales to China." Throughout this period China eyed advanced Russian weapons, but bar a few samples, Moscow refused to deliver fearing that China would copy the technologies. China's orders for jets are expected to soar over the next decade. The biggest demands recorded at the air show included small passenger aircraft, with orders for an estimated 505 planes anticipated in the next 20 years.
> 
> 
> 
> Reaping much of the gain is Brazil's Embraer, the world's largest maker of regional aircraft. "China's booming economy fosters the development of its regional aviation market, which generates great opportunities for players in the aviation industry, said Guan Dongyuan, president of Embraer China.
> 
> Still, at the air show, military drones drew the lion's share of the attention. As many as 25 different types were featured in the show, with one of them inducing rain as a shield. China International Aviation & Aerospace Exhibition is the only international aerospace trade show in China that is endorsed by the Chinese central government. The biannual arms exhibition has been held in Zhuhai since 1996.



Nuff to say. 

Weapon and Technology: SU-35 for Chinese Airforce

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

Black Widow said:


> This is not welcome move, China must not be allowed the advance technology. Su35 must not be sold to china.
> 
> I don what happen to russia, Chinese have stabbed there back by illegaly copying Su27, now they are considering chinese RFP for Su35, I am sure Chinese will again do the same...
> 
> I suggest India buy Su35 and put diplomatic pressure.



Russia needs money. Su35 is a great fighter, much better than anything that China has now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Black Widow

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> EKV/MKV can shoot down the travelling ICBM in the exoatmosphere with the pinpoint accuracy, while the SAM like S-400 is really slow compared to these, and it can only use to shoot down the slower travelling aircraft.
> 
> Only US/China possess the techonology to shoot down the ICBM, while Russia is lagging far behind of it.
> 
> However, China now even moves ahead of USA in term of EKV/MKV technology.
> 
> In 2007, China has successfully tested its EKV by shoot down a satellite with an altitude of 865km.
> 
> U.S. fears debris from China satellite-killing test to hit other satellites | Mail Online
> 
> 
> In 2008, US has also tested its own by shooting down a satellite at an altitude of 210km.
> 
> U.S. to shoot down spy satellite | COSMOS magazine




 Satellite kill is not big achievement, many country can achieve it, including Pakistan and Korea. But the question is Are they INSANE??? By shooting Satellite we are playing with fire, the derby produced by the kill remain in atmosphere and may cause damage to future projects.

World is not Insane as communists are, they know effect of such dangerous tests. 
*Space does not belong to some one Father. it belongs to our next generation*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Jade said:


> Russia needs money. Su35 is a great fighter, much better than anything that China has now.



A great fighter on the paper only indeed!!!


----------



## Jade

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Nuff to say.
> 
> Weapon and Technology: SU-35 for Chinese Airforce



Because of false nationalism,I hope China would say no.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Black Widow said:


> Satellite kill is not big achievement, many country can achieve it, including Pakistan and Korea. But the question is Are they INSANE??? By shooting Satellite we are playing with fire, the derby produced by the kill remain in atmosphere and may cause damage to future projects.
> 
> World is not Insane as communists are, they know effect of such dangerous tests.
> *Space does not belong to some one Father. it belongs to our next generation*



Shooting down a satellite is really similar to shooting down an ICBM, even US views it as the top cutting edge technology.

So they must be some crazy commies according to your logic?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Shooting down a satellite is really similar to shooting down an ICBM, even US views it as the top cutting edge technology.
> 
> So they must be some crazy commies according to your logic?



Any country that has Polar Satellite Launch technology can shoot down a satellite. It is not 'cutting edge'

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gnimgnay

ManuZ said:


> This really doesnt make any sense....
> Why do the chinese need su 35sss???
> They have multi ,medium fighter jets like j10 jf17s and all which they produced on their own and with collaboration....h 100
> And according to them they all work fine and is in the league of the best fighters...
> They have a defense industrial complex with 100billion $ budget...
> can some chinese friends over here plz explain why they need su 35s???


 
China probably are not going to buy Su35. I think this Russian report is for stimulating India to buy Su35. Another possible reason is that Russia doesn't sell the engine alone and you know China wants AL41 so bad.


----------



## aimarraul

oh.it's a good news,we will order one su35,then reseach it with our best friend.....


----------



## pzkilo

Again, again and again, this is freaking boring. China will buy su35 soon brabrabrabra....year after year, but in the end it always never happens.

Can some of u indian not grow up plz? 
This is a thread called "Russia ready to sell Su-35 fighter jets to China" in this forum 1 year ago, before J20 came out.....
http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...-su-35-fighter-jets-china-11.html#post1361170


----------



## Black Widow

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Shooting down a satellite is really similar to shooting down an ICBM, even US views it as the top cutting edge technology.
> So they must be some crazy commies according to your logic?





No it is not, Its not great achievement. ICBMs trajectory is less predictable than Satellite. ICBMs fly faster than satellite. ICBM are more difficult to intercept than satellite. To destroy Satellite you just need long range missile and little technology. 

Even Bangladesh and Burma can achieve it. It just that they will not do it , coz Its not good for earth.. 

@Su35: If Chinese are not buying it, I will be happy. If Russian are selling them, India should ask them not to, and propose them similar deal.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Jade said:


> Any country that has Polar Satellite Launch technology can shoot down a satellite. It is not 'cutting edge'



You can launch them, but you can't catch them at the pinpoint accuracy.

ICBM reentry vehicle: Up to 14,000km/h
Satellite in low earth orbit: 29,000km/h

Projectile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Heck it is travelling faster than an ICBM, you can't even catch an ICBM, let alone something faster than this.

---------- Post added at 04:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:14 AM ----------




Black Widow said:


> No it is not, Its not great achievement. ICBMs trajectory is less predictable than Satellite. ICBMs fly faster than satellite. ICBM are more difficult to intercept than satellite. To destroy Satellite you just need long range missile and little technology.
> 
> Even Bangladesh and Burma can achieve it. It just that they will not do it , coz Its not good for earth..
> 
> @Su35: If Chinese are not buying it, I will be happy. If Russian are selling them, India should ask them not to, and propose them similar deal.



Yeah, so we have performed a live test for you by shooting two ICBM missiles simultaneously just in two years ago. 

China shoots down ICBM mid-course, Anti-ballistic missile intercept a success - YouTube


----------



## Black Widow

FairAndUnbiased said:


> Isn't Su-35 a bomber platform anyways?
> 
> Also, S-400 is not that bad, the requirements for ballistic missile interception and aircraft interception are different. Its still better to use domestic systems though, even if they're inferior, but buying the S-400 can inspire us with some of its design tricks.



No Su35 is not fighter bomber, Its upgrade version of Su37 terminator. Truly Air dominance fighter. Su35 BM is one of the best flanker produced.



> Yeah, so we have performed a live test for you by shooting two ICBM missiles simultaneously just two years ago.



Thats different story, I was talking Bout ASAT. ASAT is not a big deal. Anything with predictable path is easily catchable. Size of Satellite is much larger than size of Re-entry vehicle. So its not big deal...

Looks like You are unable to understand my post, My post means "Intercepting ICBM is much diffficult, Intercepting Satellite is easy.". If any country has ICBM intercepting capability, they can easily perform ASAT. While if some country has ASAT that doesn't mean it can intercept ICBM...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aimarraul

Black Widow said:


> @Su35: If Chinese are not buying it, I will be happy.* If Russian are selling them, India should ask them not to*, and propose them similar deal.


----------



## Gnimgnay

Harry Potter said:


> So PLAAF now wants Russian Su-35 fighters.
> This means Chinese 4.5 gen fighter jet projects have failed.


It is not likely. But it is true China is having hard time to develop new engine. If China is going to buy Su35, it's the engine they want but Russia doesn't sell it alone.


----------



## pzkilo

Now, this news come out again: China will buy su35 soon brabrabrabra.....

Isnt it dramatic?


----------



## SQ8

Harry Potter said:


> So PLAAF now wants Russian Su-35 fighters.
> This means Chinese 4.5 gen fighter jet projects have failed.



Hmm.. India wants to buy the Rafale.. this means that the MKI and LCA have failed..





You see how dumb that sounds..

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Black Widow said:


> Thats different story, I was talking Bout ASAT. ASAT is not a big deal.



Yeah, it is a big deal, only 3 tests have been performed so far in the history.

1985 USA
2007 China
2008 USA

Do you truly believe everyone can master this technology?

---------- Post added at 04:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:23 AM ----------




Gnimgnay said:


> It is not likely. But it is true China is having hard time to develop new engine. If China is going to buy Su35, it's the engine they want but Russia doesn't sell it alone.



Its engine is just an AL-31 on steroid, which is something we don't really need. 

Our current engine is not related to AL-31 at all.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Gnimgnay

Gnimgnay said:


> It is not likely. But it is true China is having hard time to develop new engine. If China is going to buy Su35, it's the engine they want but Russia doesn't sell it alone.


 


Black Widow said:


> No it is not, Its not great achievement. ICBMs trajectory is less predictable than Satellite. ICBMs fly faster than satellite. ICBM are more difficult to intercept than satellite. To destroy Satellite you just need long range missile and little technology.
> 
> Even Bangladesh and Burma can achieve it. It just that they will not do it , coz Its not good for earth..
> 
> @Su35: If Chinese are not buying it, I will be happy. If Russian are selling them, India should ask them not to, and propose them similar deal.


I guess that's the purpose of this Russian article.

---------- Post added at 03:29 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:26 AM ----------




Gnimgnay said:


> It is not likely. But it is true China is having hard time to develop new engine. If China is going to buy Su35, it's the engine they want but Russia doesn't sell it alone.


 


ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Yeah, it is a big deal, only 3 tests have been performed so far in the history.
> 
> 1985 USA
> 2007 China
> 2008 USA
> 
> Do you truly believe everyone can master this technology?
> 
> ---------- Post added at 04:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:23 AM ----------
> 
> 
> 
> Its engine is just an AL-31 on steroid, which is something we don't really need.
> 
> Our current engine is not related to AL-31 at all.


 
Hmm, somehow I think new Su35 has AL41on it.


----------



## pzkilo

Sorry, we r not going to buy su35. If u indian are interested in it, go ahead, we r happy. I m not joking BUY BUY BUY...


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Gnimgnay said:


> I guess that's the purpose of this Russian article.
> 
> ---------- Post added at 03:29 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:26 AM ----------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, somehow I think new Su35 has AL41on it.



The original AL-41 was meant to rival the F119 of P&W, but since the collapse of USSR, the program has been terminated.

Now the present AL-41 is not related to the original AL-41, but an upgrade of AL-31.

F119 is 5th gen engine, while the present AL-41 is just a 4.5th gen at best.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## HongWu

Russia is just sore because China's J-20 is far superior to its own T-50.

Fake news.


----------



## Skull and Bones

HongWu said:


> Russia is just sore because China's J-20 is far superior to its own T-50.
> 
> Fake news.



Ok, now move aside. Adults are talking.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

HongWu said:


> Russia is just sore because China's J-20 is far superior to its own T-50.
> 
> Fake news.



Their media was parroting how China can't build the arresting cable, later the fake rumor got completely debunked.

This is how far the credibility of their media goes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DARKY

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Yeah, it is a big deal, only 3 tests have been performed so far in the history.
> 
> 1985 USA
> 2007 China
> 2008 USA
> 
> Do you truly believe everyone can master this technology?



Yes.. any country which can launch satellites... Hitting a predetermined orbit is a lot easier than hitting a maneuvering target... No one does because it can create huge debris in space which can damage a lot of satellites and a space ships currently orbiting the earth... and is like a waste of money... the debris are simply governed by the laws of physics and can damage the satellites of the country which is teasing as well.



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Its engine is just an AL-31 on steroid, which is something we don't really need.
> 
> Our current engine is not related to AL-31 at all.



The engine used is Item 117C/S the fan blades are 3% larger and the core used is of Al-41 turbofans... giving it a T/W ratio of 10.5-11 which enables Su35BM to fly in supercrusie... and this is exactly what China needs for their 5th gen. Fighter as their domestic program for making high T/W is facing many problems... and is probably the reason why only one PT of J-20 is flying... and the other SAC fighter is not out yet...

While the engine used in PAK FA is Item 117 a direct derivative of AL-41 turbofans.. however the final production variant will have an entirely different engine... Item-29/129 most probably with even higher T/W ratio.. enabling extremely high maneuverability and supersonic flight characteristics.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Black Widow

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Yeah, it is a big deal, only 3 tests have been performed so far in the history.
> 
> 1985 USA
> 2007 China
> 2008 USA
> Do you truly believe everyone can master this technology?




Americans are arrogant, they pollute the space in 1985 and 2008. Communists are cruel, They did the same in 2007. Rest of world are neither arrogant nor cruel. And yes ASAT technology is piece of cake, any one who can launch SLV/PSLV/GSLV can intercept satellite. 

Russia, china, French, Brits or Iran, any one of this nation can do it. Hope its clear to you now. 

OMG! its typical communist trap to derail the topic.. @topic: I will be happy if Russia denies Su35 or China don't buy it, or India do some diplomacy to prevent china accessing Su35...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MehrotraPrince

Oscar said:


> Hmm.. India wants to buy the Rafale.. this means that the MKI and LCA have failed..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You see how dumb that sounds..


 
*Troll* : Those who try to divert the topic of discussion.

MKI is heavy fighter, LCA is light fighter while Rafale belongs to medium class. We are not so advanced in aircraft technology so we need technology from other nations to learn. That is the reason we are buying Rafale. Failure is when you quit something, so need not to say whether LCA is failure or not.

Chinese fanboys claim that their technology is superior than Russian and even sometimes better than USA. J-10 is medium class fighter, J-20 is heavy class fighter, Su-35 too is heavy class fighter.


I doubt the authenticity of this news.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Black Widow

MehrotraPrince said:


> *Troll* : Those who try to divert the topic of discussion.
> 
> MKI is heavy fighter, LCA is light fighter while Rafale belongs to medium class. We are not so advanced in aircraft technology so we need technology from other nations to learn. That is the reason we are buying Rafale. Failure is when you quit something, so need not to say whether LCA is failure or not.
> 
> Chinese fanboys claim that their technology is superior than Russian and even sometimes better than USA. J-10 is medium class fighter, J-20 is heavy class fighter, Su-35 too is heavy class fighter.
> 
> 
> *I doubt the authenticity of this news.*



I wish you are right.


----------



## Zabaniyah

Black Widow said:


> Satellite kill is not big achievement, many country can achieve it, including Pakistan and Korea. But the question is Are they INSANE??? By shooting Satellite we are playing with fire, the derby produced by the kill remain in atmosphere and may cause damage to future projects.
> 
> World is not Insane as communists are, they know effect of such dangerous tests.
> *Space does not belong to some one Father. it belongs to our next generation*



It's not easy shooting down a satellite. Not everyone can do it. 

Yes, the Americans did...freak out a little


----------



## Black Widow

Zabaniya said:


> It's not easy shooting down a satellite. Not everyone can do it.
> 
> Yes, the Americans did...freak out a little



My dear brother, If BD can launch Sattelite. which Insha allah it will. It *can* shoot down a sattelite as well. Satellite launch is so advance now, that you can place your satellite in place with accuracy of meters. If you can place them accurately, you can kill them accurately.


But I am sure that BD won't do it. (Coz we are neither Arrogant nor Insane). We (rest of world) know and believe peaceful use of space. 

*Read it*

Nasa scientists monitored the small piece of debris for 11 hours before deciding it no longer posed a threat
Astronauts aboard the International Space Station have narrowly avoided a collision with a 6in piece of space junk.
Nasa scientists monitored the small piece of debris for 11 hours before deciding yesterday afternoon that it no longer posed a danger to the ISS and the three astronauts on board.
Commander Dmitry Kondratyev and his crew had been preparing to climb into their attached Russian Soyuz capsule to take shelter. 
But an hour before they feared it might collide, Mission Control radioed the good news.


Imagine by using ASAT how many 6 inch derby we will produce?? Are we Mad enough to do it????

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Black Widow

This is the result of Chinese ASAT test, DO you want us to do same????Think twice... If all country test 1 ASAT each the earth will be like this







See hoe its affect the spacecrafts






and

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DARKY

Zabaniya said:


> It's not easy shooting down a satellite. Not everyone can do it.
> 
> Yes, the Americans did...freak out a little



My good friend... I repeat again.. any country which launches satellites in space or can make motors for the 3rd stage of an ICBM can Hit a satellite in space... since you know the path.. and can determine the point where you can detonate your warhead... Unlike in Intercepting a Missile Its relatively easier.. although more costly and heavier Interceptors are involved.

Here.. This is the Russian weapon Gorgon... for anti-satellite/ABM role...






It can Intercept satellites and BMs to much higher altitude than what China did... just look at the size of monster... can you Imagine what would happen to hundreds of satellite in vicinity when this explodes.

This is since the Sputnik launch in 1957...






Here a good read..

Space junk and the environment: it's a very dark picture indeed

More Images..

NASA - A Beehive of Satellites

We cannot be as Irresponsible can *WE ?*.. Off course that does not apply to a Country which depends more on its Nuclear arsenal for Its survival against Its rivals..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AerospaceEngineer

China has no interests in SU-35. 

Reasons??

1. J-10B is already in mass production and it is better than SU-35. J-10B has AESA radar, much better avonics, better airframe, and much smaller RCS. J-10B's A2G is also better! The only thing SU-35BM has an edge is payload and range.

2. J-11B is now active, and more than 100 of them have been build!!

3. J-20 will be ready by 2017, so there is really no point for SU-35BM at all.


S-400?? Maybe, but China already have newer SAM under developmennt, so the need is not that great. When the first S-400 deliver to China, China's newest SAM will be ready too.


People, especially the indians are once again exposed to their infeiorty complex, because they saw the rapid and massive success of the Chinese, and are trying anything to put down and belittle China. lol, but it only embarass them even more.

*FACT!!! indians are always bitter and EVNY China's success and far superior performance!!*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## chinapakistan

But we are not ready to buy junk, why not ask your indian friends?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rcrmj

Black Widow said:


> This is the result of Chinese ASAT test, DO you want us to do same????Think twice... If all country test 1 ASAT each the earth will be like this



primitive Indians finding hilarious excuses for not be able to shoot satellite... and if India 'has' the technology you will not only conducting it but will put on huge bollywood style propgaganda and baosting it as if only allien techs can rival it.


----------



## airuah

CHINESE MEMBERS IN THIS FORUM "WE HAVE BETTER TECHNOLOGY THAN RUSSIA, WE BUILD OUR OWN PLANES WE HAVE OUR OWN MISSILES WHICH ARE BETTER THAN RUSSIA'S"

CHINESE GOVT:" RUSSIA PLEASE GIVE US Su35, S 400 SINCE OUR SYSTEM SUCKS"

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AerospaceEngineer

airuah said:


> CHINESE MEMBERS IN THIS FORUM "WE HAVE BETTER TECHNOLOGY THAN RUSSIA, WE BUILD OUR OWN PLANES WE HAVE OUR OWN MISSILES WHICH ARE BETTER THAN RUSSIA'S"
> 
> CHINESE GOVT:" RUSSIA PLEASE GIVE US Su35, S 400 SINCE OUR SYSTEM SUCKS"





According to you indians only.

China does have superior tech in Super Computer, high speed rail way, IT, medical instruments, etc etc..........

Also, China is not interested in SU-35 and that is a fact. Even S-400 is not that appealing anymore.


It is your indian nature to feel bitter and ENVY China's success, which is clearly exposed by your infeirorty complex!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AerospaceEngineer

Also, I can pull out some OLD CRAPs!!!!!


1. Russia: " China to buy 50 SU-33 from Russia". 

China to Buy Su-33 Carrier-Based Fighters from Russia?

Proven bullsh!t, China already has J-15 which is better than SU-33.


2. China to buy more Kilo subs from Russia!

I dont even need to provide link for this one. Once again bullsh!t as usuall!



Want me to say more?

---------- Post added at 05:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:37 AM ----------




rcrmj said:


> primitive Indians finding hilarious excuses for not be able to shoot satellite... and if India 'has' the technology you will not only conducting it but will put on huge bollywood style propgaganda and baosting it as if only allien techs can rival it.




india does NOT even have the capability to send a bug into space.



Yet funny thing is that India "plan" to land the moon.

Here:

India plants flag on Moon ? The Register

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pzkilo

Oscar said:


> Hmm.. India wants to buy the Rafale.. this means that the MKI and LCA have failed..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You see how dumb that sounds..


Hahaha, Great logic, isnt it?


----------



## retaxis

Logic fails Indians to the point that at times it fails Nigerians...Do we always have to discuss why Nigeria is a social/political failure compared to China? No..Why must we even bother to appease Indians in similar fashion? both Live in big slums with caste/religious issues dividing man from man with no unity. We should just sit back, relax and watch the civil war hit the sh1t storm.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Alfa-Fighter

AerospaceEngineer said:


> China has no interests in SU-35.
> 
> Reasons??
> 
> 1. J-10B is already in mass production and it is better than SU-35. J-10B has AESA radar, much better avonics, better airframe, and much smaller RCS. J-10B's A2G is also better! The only thing SU-35BM has an edge is payload and range.
> 
> 2. J-11B is now active, and more than 100 of them have been build!!
> 
> 3. J-20 will be ready by 2017, so there is really no point for SU-35BM at all.
> 
> 
> S-400?? Maybe, but China already have newer SAM under developmennt, so the need is not that great. When the first S-400 deliver to China, China's newest SAM will be ready too.
> 
> 
> People, especially the indians are once again exposed to their infeiorty complex, because they saw the rapid and massive success of the Chinese, and are trying anything to put down and belittle China. lol, but it only embarass them even more.
> 
> *FACT!!! indians are always bitter and EVNY China's success and far superior performance!!*


One simple Questing 

What is RCS of J10B?


----------



## tvsram1992

Oscar said:


> Hmm.. India wants to buy the Rafale.. this means that the MKI and LCA have failed..
> You see how dumb that sounds..


Yes LCA was delayed and you can say failed since it was not in time . So we are buying Rafale and we dont have any other airsuperiority fighter program so we brought Mki in 1990's . And how dumb it sounds including a foregin plane in our failure list? Oh wait u mean to say mki is ours?


----------



## conworldus

Fake news with fake Indian orgy that once again they can prove that China "sucks".


----------



## Akasa

Let's look at it rationally.

1. If the Chinese are really buying the Su-35, then why are they investing so much in their J-11B, J-15, and J-10B platforms? Why start up all the production lines and devote their entire WS-10 line to the J-11B, J-15, J-10B if they are still going to order Su-35s?

2. The last time Russian sources reported on PLA aviation, they mentioned that the PLA is buying the Su-33. What ended up happening was that the Chinese built their J-15, which uses a Su-33 airframe design, but with much more advanced systems such as RAM, composites, AESA, MAW, etc. In short, Russian sources on PLA aviation is not accurate.

3. If the PLA was buying the Su-35, then that means that they will be delivered by 2015 at the earliest. By that time the 5th generation fighter would be almost in production.

4. There is absolutely no point in buying the Su-35 when current Chinese 4.5 generation fighter incorporate all of the upgrades as the Su-35, such as the radar absorbent material, composites, upgraded engine, AESA, and to a greater extent in some aspects.

5. There has been no news on the Chinese part and so far that is the only webpage that mentions it.

So I'm not going to comment on those idiots who say that the Su-35 is "better than anything China has", for they need to do something called research. These are simply what I'm trying to point out.

---------- Post added at 09:33 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:31 AM ----------




Harry Potter said:


> So PLAAF now wants Russian Su-35 fighters.
> This means Chinese 4.5 gen fighter jet projects have failed.



Yes, a "failed 4.5 gen fighter" that has been mass produced and incorporates not only all of the Su-35's upgrades such as RAM, AESA, composites, MAW, upgraded engine, and even to a greater extent in some aspects. If they are "failed projects", then what is the Su-35? A travesty?

---------- Post added at 09:34 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:33 AM ----------




Federer said:


> Recently They went to their feet for RD-33 Engines.
> 
> WS-10 Failed.



And yet it's being equipped with the J-11B, J-15, and J-10B. At least they actually managed to enter service, unlike some country's LCA.

---------- Post added at 09:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:34 AM ----------




Jade said:


> Russia needs money. Su35 is a great fighter, much better than anything that China has now.



Yeah, with the exception of the J-11B, J-15, J-10B. Oh and don't forget the 5th generation fighter.


----------



## God of Death

And so much so hoopla for made in china stuff like J10, J20, J2000.


----------



## Akasa

Jade said:


> Any country that has Polar Satellite Launch technology can shoot down a satellite. It is not 'cutting edge'



India hasn't. In fact, any country except for US, Russia, China, hasn't.

---------- Post added at 09:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:36 AM ----------




airuah said:


> CHINESE MEMBERS IN THIS FORUM "WE HAVE BETTER TECHNOLOGY THAN RUSSIA, WE BUILD OUR OWN PLANES WE HAVE OUR OWN MISSILES WHICH ARE BETTER THAN RUSSIA'S"
> 
> CHINESE GOVT:" RUSSIA PLEASE GIVE US Su35, S 400 SINCE OUR SYSTEM SUCKS"



When in reality:

RUSSIAN NEWS: WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AS IF CHINA WANTS TO BUY OUR STUFF, EVEN WHEN THEY HAVEN'T EVEN MENTIONED IT, BECAUSE WE KNOW OUR INDUSTRY IS FALLING BEHIND AND WON'T HAVE GREAT COMPETITION WITH THEIR STUFF.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## isro2222

Big shame. China wants russian jet fighter (yet again).. That too which india rejected.. LoL


----------



## Zabaniyah

isro2222 said:


> Big shame. China wants russian jet fighter (yet again).. *That too which india rejected.*. LoL



Since when?


----------



## Bobby

AerospaceEngineer said:


> Also, I can pull out some OLD CRAPs!!!!!
> 
> 
> 1. Russia: " China to buy 50 SU-33 from Russia".
> 
> China to Buy Su-33 Carrier-Based Fighters from Russia?
> 
> Proven bullsh!t, China already has J-15 which is better than SU-33.
> 
> 
> 2. China to buy more Kilo subs from Russia!
> 
> I dont even need to provide link for this one. Once again bullsh!t as usuall!
> 
> 
> 
> Want me to say more?
> 
> ---------- Post added at 05:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:37 AM ----------
> 
> 
> 
> *
> india does NOT even have the capability to send a bug into space.*
> 
> 
> 
> Yet funny thing is that India "plan" to land the moon.
> 
> Here:
> 
> India plants flag on Moon ? The Register


 
We leave bugs for Chinese to eat.....Go read about Chandrayan and Satellite launching capabilities of India before demonstrating your intellect.


----------



## isro2222

@ zabania u can search g0ogle. i got no time as am not 50 cent army.. Tomarrow its my office day. internet is not my office unlike 50 cent army.. By the way super sukhoi30mki is nearly an su-35.. http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-photos-multimedia/159742-russian-air-force-sukhoi-su-35-a.html


----------



## Jade

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> You can launch them, but you can't catch them at the pinpoint accuracy.
> 
> ICBM reentry vehicle: Up to 14,000km/h
> Satellite in low earth orbit: 29,000km/h
> 
> Projectile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Heck it is travelling faster than an ICBM, you can't even catch an ICBM, let alone something faster than this.
> 
> ---------- Post added at 04:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:14 AM ----------
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, so we have performed a live test for you by shooting two ICBM missiles simultaneously just in two years ago.
> 
> China shoots down ICBM mid-course, Anti-ballistic missile intercept a success - YouTube



The technology to shoot satellites has been there since cold war. It is nothing 'cutting edge'



> Given the technology for shooting down satellites has been around since the Cold War, it is hard to see the technological imperative for countries such as China to conduct such tests. While Beijing may have made a political statement (for good or bad) with its 2007 test, if it remains committed to the peaceful use of space then it is hard to understand the advantage of shooting down further satellites. Indeed, with the U.S made Vanguard 1 still in orbit since launch in 1958, one has to wonder why China feels compelled to shoot down satellites that are several decades younger. The debris caused by such tests is a major risk for other space users and given its potential to upset the prospects for a space weapons treaty, it seems evident that China should refrain from further anti-satellite launches.



The whole articles is below 

Nukes of Hazard Blog - Blog


----------



## Broccoli

Is there any other source for this news? So far only that site has reported it.


----------



## Akasa

isro2222 said:


> Big shame. China wants russian jet fighter (yet again).. That too which india rejected.. LoL



This is Russian news reporting unsubstantiated stuff, again, like they did with the Su-33 (we all know how that turned out).


----------



## j20blackdragon

Who the hell needs Su-35 when you can choose from a selection like this?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## S10

Next thing you know, Russians will be saying we'll buy their T-50 and some Indians will get an orgasm out of that.

Meanwhile, we'll do our own thing.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Akasa

S10 said:


> Next thing you know, Russians will be saying we'll buy their T-50 and some Indians will get an orgasm out of that.
> 
> Meanwhile, we'll do our own thing.



Just like how they claimed their T-50 was better than the F-22 and J-20.

---------- Post added at 05:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:42 PM ----------




j20blackdragon said:


> Who the hell needs Su-35 when you can choose from a selection like this?



All of them are incorporated with AESA, radar absorbent material, composites, MAW, next generation electronics, and new cockpits, the same upgrades seen on the Su-35BM and European fighters.


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Sometimes in order to show solidarity , you buy stuff you don't need but it might be useful on Border with India


----------



## zzzz

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I think S-400 will be a good seller in countries of Middle East and Southeast Asia, but China's EKV/MKV technology is decades ahead of this.
> 
> Saying China can't build the SAM like S-400 is simply saying like US can't build a frigate.
> 
> As for Su-35, it is just an upgraded Su-27, no thanks, it is not useful for us at all.



Thats like saying US Trident technology decades ahead of Israeli Spike missiles  

Or Russian TU-95 tech decades ahead of US F-22  

Stupidity beyond belief


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

zzzz said:


> Thats like saying US Trident technology decades ahead of Israeli Spike missiles
> 
> Or Russian TU-95 tech decades ahead of US F-22
> 
> Stupidity beyond belief



The first comparison is valid, but the second comparison is dull, try B-2 Spirit and Su-27. 

BTW, saying China needs S-400 is truly BS.


----------



## ptldM3

AerospaceEngineer said:


> China has no interests in SU-35.
> 
> Reasons??
> 
> 1. J-10B is already in mass production and it is better than SU-35. J-10B has AESA radar, much better avonics, better airframe, and much smaller RCS. J-10B's A2G is also better! The only thing SU-35BM has an edge is payload and range.




With all due respect, where do you get your information? What proof do you have that the J-10B has better avionics? Define what better airframe means and how is the J-10 better in air to ground when for one you have no combat record to prove it, two, you have no data to support the J-10B has better avionics, three the SU-35 has a combat proven targeting pod, and lastly you yourself acknowledged that the SU-35 has better payload and range which is a major factor for a good strike aircraft.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ptldM3 said:


> With all due respect, where do you get your information? What proof do you have that the J-10B has &#8216;better avionics&#8221;? Define what better airframe means and how is the J-10 better in air to ground when for one you have no combat record to prove it, two, you have no data to support the J-10B has better avionics, three the SU-35 has a combat proven targeting pod, and lastly you yourself acknowledged that the SU-35 has better payload and range which is a major factor for a good strike aircraft.



We got fed up by the constant BS from your media, you better to stay away from us.

They even spread the lie about how China cannot build the arresting cable of the aircraft carrier, this really shows how credible they are.


----------



## zzzz

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The first comparison is valid, but the second comparison is dull, try B-2 Spirit and Su-27.
> 
> BTW, saying China needs S-400 is truly BS.



Why dull, compare range and payload of TU-95 and F-22, decades ahead in tech according to your logic 

We can compare prices also. Trident missile indeed cost much more than Spike, that actually shows how much it more complicated. Now lets compare price of S-400 system and price of your anti-ballistic missile

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

zzzz said:


> Why dull, compare range and payload of TU-95 and F-22, decades ahead in tech according to your logic
> 
> We can compare prices also. Trident missile indeed cost much more than Spike, that actually shows how much it more complicated. Now lets compare price of S-400 system and price of your anti-ballistic missile



The trick of our anti-ballistic missile is mainly about the EKV warhead, if we can make this thing cheaper than your S-400, then this is indeed not a good sign for Russia.


----------



## zzzz

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The trick of our anti-ballistic missile is mainly about the EKV warhead, if we can make this thing cheaper than your S-400, then this is indeed not a good sign for Russia.



I think latest Patriot sytem cost even more than S-400. That surely proves that US tech even more behind than Russian in comparison to Chinese technological achievments

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

zzzz said:


> I think latest Patriot sytem cost even more than S-400. That surely proves that US tech even more behind than Russian in comparison to Chinese technological achievments



Their anti-ballistic missile defence is indeed ahead of Russia, they have developed the EKV during the 1980s, while Soviet Union had a different approach in regard of the ABMD, it is to detonate a nuclear bomb in the exoatmosphere when the ICBM is getting closer, but this method is extremely inefficient and suicidal.

USA believed they were the best in term of the anti-missile/anti-satellite technology, that's why they didn't progress that much since the 1980s, until in 2007, they just discovered that China now possessed the similar technology or even better, and the ICBM interception contest of 2010 further proves that China is moving ahead of them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## zzzz

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Their anti-ballistic missile defence is indeed ahead of Russia, they have developed the EKV during the 1980s, while Soviet Union had a different approach in regard of the ABMD, it is to detonate a nuclear bomb in the exoatmosphere when the ICBM is getting closer, but this method is extremely inefficient and suicidal.



Soviet Union and Russia had more than one approach in regard to ABM. There are nuclear as well as conventional anti-ballistic missiles exist. And this method actually more efficient, detonating near incoming missile much easier than trying to hit it kinetically, that results in much higher kill ratio. But China never managed to develop such technology. Why is that? Obviously because you need to launch not just empty missile but misslile with payload. And this method requires much more advanced level of technology. Pity, yeah?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

zzzz said:


> Soviet Union and Russia had more than one approach in regard to ABM. There are nuclear as well as conventional anti-ballistic missiles exist. And this method actually more efficient, detonating near incoming missile much easier than trying to hit it kinetically, that results in much higher kill ratio. But China never managed to develop such technology. Why is that? Obviously because you need to launch not just empty missile but misslile with payload. And this method requires much more advanced level of technology. Pity, yeah?



Well, you would basically kill yourself with those radioactive fallout above your atmosphere.

That's why both US and China chose the kinetic warhead over this suicidal method.

At the time of USSR, the supercomputing technology simply can't compare to today's, that's why it is almost impossible for them to achieve the pinpoint accuracy of the kinetic weapons.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## zzzz

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Well, you would basically kill yourself with those radioactive fallout above your atmosphere.
> 
> That's why both US and China chose the kinetic warhead over this suicidal method.
> 
> At the time of USSR, the supercomputing technology simply can't compare to today's, that's why it is almost impossible for them to achieve the pinpoint accuracy of the kinetic weapons.



Well i said there are anti-ballistic missiles with conventional payload exist in Russia. And BTW if missile have a payload it doesnt mean that it cannt hit target kinetically or it is not accurate. Having payload just an additional guarantee of destroyng the target.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pzkilo

isro2222 said:


> Big shame. China wants russian jet fighter (yet again).. That too which india rejected.. LoL


 
too young too simple, sometimes naive


----------



## DelhiDareDevil

This also convinces me that, JF-17 is not a good jet, as China who co produces them, is shunning JF-17 from day one too over Russian jets and its own better jets.


----------



## soldierofallah

Hahaha itll only be a matter of time till the chinease have their own version by copying it.


----------



## tvsram1992

SinoSoldier said:


> Yeah, with the exception of the J-11B, J-15, J-10B. Oh and don't forget the 5th generation fighter.


 heights of wet dreams...Su35 will be inferior to Chinese 4th gen aircrafts ... evry 1 make a note of it .


----------



## retaxis

Only thing war ever tests is credibility...China was a weak nation with no ecnonomy ( half of Indians economy in 62) but war fighting spirit allowed the chinese to destroy the Indians in war. Remember friends of the world..to fight china is to either wipe them out with nuclear weapons or fight the most blood thirsty war you can ever imagine.


----------



## tvsram1992

retaxis said:


> Only thing war ever tests is credibility...China was a weak nation with no ecnonomy ( half of Indians economy in 62) but war fighting spirit allowed the chinese to destroy the Indians in war. Remember friends of the world..to fight china is to either *wipe them out with nuclear weapons or fight the most blood thirsty war you can ever imagine*.


same applies for every nuclear country... The only mistake we made in 1962 was underestimation and lack of preparedness, if we had done preemptive strike like what pakistan did in 1971, we would clearly have an upper hand . Nehru thought we could have easily won as we drove out french and dutch .


----------



## conworldus

If I were mod I would close this thread of fake news.


----------



## Akasa

tvsram1992 said:


> heights of wet dreams...Su35 will be inferior to Chinese 4th gen aircrafts ... evry 1 make a note of it .



If you want a "height of a wet dream" then you are right on it reading this Russian news.


----------



## Zabaniyah

S10 said:


> Next thing you know, Russians will be saying we'll buy their T-50 and some Indians will get an orgasm out of that.
> 
> Meanwhile, we'll do our own thing.



They already did. 
Russia said the T50 is expected to export more than 600 Chinese could buy 100 « Military of China, force comment.


----------



## Malik Alashter

I don't believe< china will acquire any Su-35? because china already in the final stage of developing the j-11b>


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Malik Alashter said:


> I don't believe< china will acquire any Su-35? because china already in the final stage of developing the j-11b>



J-11B is old new, we are in the final stage of J-16.

The first squadron of J-16 has been developed in December 2011.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Jungibaaz

DelhiDareDevil said:


> This also convinces me that, JF-17 is not a good jet,as China who co produces them, is shunning JF-17 from day one too over Russian jets and its own better jets.


*I don't know whether to laugh or cry at the site of this*..

Lets see...
Fake, unreliable news report convinces you that a fighter of a completely different class is not a good jet.

 you've logged 1800+ posts here, you should know better.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## NirmalKrish

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I think S-400 will be a good seller in countries of Middle East and Southeast Asia, but China's EKV/MKV technology is decades ahead of this.
> 
> Saying China can't build the SAM like S-400 is simply saying like US can't build a frigate.
> 
> As for Su-35, it is just an upgraded Su-27, no thanks, it is not useful for us at all.



Yes thats right it wont be useful once the blueprints are copied and mass produced only to be called the J-11 gross copyright violations ever and to save your face talk under the table with the Russians. Typical Chinese behaviour when it comes to intellectual property.


----------



## Akasa

NirmalKrish said:


> Yes thats right it wont be useful once the blueprints are copied and mass produced only to be called the J-11 gross copyright violations ever and to save your face talk under the table with the Russians. Typical Chinese behaviour when it comes to intellectual property.



Yes, the J-11B was copied and yet it somehow incorporates completely set of technologies from the Flanker, and even includes upgrades that are only seen on the latest Flankers. Perhaps you should take a look at your own behavior when it comes to getting facts right.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## NirmalKrish

SinoSoldier said:


> Yes, the J-11B was copied and yet it somehow incorporates completely set of technologies from the Flanker, and even includes upgrades that are only seen on the latest Flankers. Perhaps you should take a look at your own behavior when it comes to getting facts right.



Setting apart avionics, the airframe design and structure is still the same as a su-27 with minor tweaks. People in the world are not that blind to let this go unnoticed. Back to topic it would be very unlikely that the Russians will be able to transfer any technology to china, ESP that of the Su-35 and S-400 that&#8217;s technical suicide in the very best.


----------



## Malik Alashter

any info about the j-16??? I know they"re developing the j-15 but I have no clue about the J-16 thanks.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Malik Alashter said:


> any info about the j-16??? I know they"re developing the j-15 but I have no clue about the J-16 thanks.



J-16 is a multirole fighter incorporated with some stealth features, its comparable aircraft is the Silent Eagle of Boeing.


----------



## Akasa

NirmalKrish said:


> Setting apart avionics, the airframe design and structure is still the same as a su-27 with minor tweaks. People in the world are not that blind to let this go unnoticed. Back to topic it would be very unlikely that the Russians will be able to transfer any technology to china, ESP that of the Su-35 and S-400 thats technical suicide in the very best.



Actually, everything except for the airframe design was designed by China. The only link that the J-11B has to Flanker is its airframe design. Even the airframe was upgraded with radar absorbent material and composites.

The Su-35S uses the same airframe design as the Su-27 and yet it is different. The S-400 was reported to be jointly developed by China.

---------- Post added at 05:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:04 PM ----------




ChineseTiger1986 said:


> J-16 is a multirole fighter incorporated with some stealth features, its comparable aircraft is the Silent Eagle of Boeing.



I think we all agreed that stealth features are not present; it is simply a J-11BS with attack ability.


----------



## Malik Alashter

Any pics of it?.


----------



## rcrmj

Jungibaaz said:


> *I don't know whether to laugh or cry at the site of this*..
> 
> Lets see...
> Fake, unreliable news report convinces you that a fighter of a completely different class is not a good jet.
> 
> you've logged 1800+ posts here, you should know better.


c'mon, he lives in england with Indian delusion, I bet he went to India less than I do..lol

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rcrmj

tvsram1992 said:


> same applies for every nuclear country... The only mistake we made in 1962 was underestimation and lack of preparedness, if we had done preemptive strike like what pakistan did in 1971, we would clearly have an upper hand . Nehru thought we could have easily won as we drove out french and dutch .


 
lol funny indian excuses, loser is loser dont find those ridiculous excuses like 'not' prepared or 'less' numbered. only idiots enter war without thorough preparation, and it is the first thing to start about everything


----------



## Alfa-Fighter

rcrmj said:


> lol funny indian excuses, loser is loser dont find those ridiculous excuses like 'not' prepared or 'less' numbered. only idiots enter war without thorough preparation, and it is the first thing to start about everything



Aren't you losses to soviets? ........ you think you always win???

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tvsram1992

rcrmj said:


> lol funny indian excuses, loser is loser dont find those ridiculous excuses like 'not' prepared or 'less' numbered. only idiots enter war without thorough preparation, and it is the first thing to start about everything


 tell this to ur dear friends and u feel u won ? We still hold your south tibet . what could u do other than protesting?

---------- Post added at 09:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:53 AM ----------

and funny that u lost to Japan . Just as u said no excuses


----------



## tvsram1992

SinoSoldier said:


> If you want a "height of a wet dream" then you are right on it reading this Russian news.


lol u still didnt get out of dream...


----------



## 1962 spanking

china is now self-sufficient in fighter jet engines (ws-10, ws-13) and satellite navigation (beidou).

great to see the development of china's domestic military industry.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 1962 spanking

dont u just love these butt hurt indians, absolutely hilarious, total frustration seeing china becoming self-sufficient in military technology. gives me even more pleasure and satisfaction seeing them squirm.

china is already one of the largest arms exporters, yet india cant make their own bullets.

our arms imports have been going down over the years.

not only that but we are making supercomputers using our own technology.

awesome news!

thats the difference between indians and chinese, indians lack the vision and motivation to improve, while chinese have vision and determination.

indians think just because they have a similar population to china, that they are some kind of rival to china, lol dont make me laugh, china is so far ahead of india its not even funny.
india should be compared with african countries. they have similar development levels and social indicators.

indians ride the success of china in the world media and they put china and india in the same sentence because of population sizes and think india is as successful as china.
then why not put america and indonesia in the same sentence because they have similar sized populations.

china is 40 years ahead of india and that lead is increasing.

whatever development india has, china will be further ahead.
thats the greatness of china, our desire to get things done, we are goal oriented people, you let us host an olympics or world expo, we give a great show, india gets a tiny commonwealth games, they mess it up with dirty athletes villages, bridges falling apart, uneven netball courts, food poisoning, etc.

only because of china's success over the last 30 years does india even gets a mention riding our coattails.

chinese are very disciplined, we have ambition, vision, humble, independent, organised and hard working.
indians are just a disorgansied country, if you dont believe me, go see how indians drive on their roads, that will tell you all you need to know about indian culture.

the worst quality in indians is when people critisize them for their shortcomings, they take things personally because they think they are perfect and attack the messenger and never improve themselves, when people critisize china, we use it as motivation to improve ourselves, to put on a greater show, to work even harder, even more determined.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## shiv

1962 spanking said:


> dont u just love these butt hurt indians, absolutely hilarious, total frustration seeing china becoming self-sufficient in military technology. gives me even more pleasure and satisfaction seeing them squirm.
> 
> china is already one of the largest arms exporters, yet india cant make their own bullets.
> 
> our arms imports have been going down over the years.
> 
> not only that but we are making supercomputers using our own technology.
> 
> awesome news!
> 
> thats the difference between indians and chinese, indians lack the vision and motivation to improve, while chinese have vision and determination.
> 
> indians think just because they have a similar population to china, that they are some kind of rival to china, lol dont make me laugh, china is so far ahead of india its not even funny.
> india should be compared with african countries. they have similar development levels and social indicators.
> 
> indians ride the success of china in the world media and they put china and india in the same sentence because of population sizes and think india is as successful as china.
> then why not put america and indonesia in the same sentence because they have similar sized populations.
> 
> china is 40 years ahead of india and that lead is increasing.
> 
> whatever development india has, china will be further ahead.
> thats the greatness of china, our desire to get things done, we are goal oriented people, you let us host an olympics or world expo, we give a great show, india gets a tiny commonwealth games, they mess it up with dirty athletes villages, bridges falling apart, uneven netball courts, food poisoning, etc.
> 
> only because of china's success over the last 30 years does india even gets a mention riding our coattails.
> 
> chinese are very disciplined, we have ambition, vision, humble, independent, organised and hard working.
> indians are just a disorgansied country, if you dont believe me, go see how indians drive on their roads, that will tell you all you need to know about indian culture.
> 
> the worst quality in indians is when people critisize them for their shortcomings, they take things personally because they think they are perfect and attack the messenger and never improve themselves, when people critisize china, we use it as motivation to improve ourselves, to put on a greater show, to work even harder, even more determined.



You made the exact post in several running threads in India-Defense section. 
Sorry, we don't talk to bots. so plz stfu !!


----------



## shiv

----self delete-----


----------



## Akasa

tvsram1992 said:


> lol u still didnt get out of dream...



Our dreams led us to rise from a dependent air force to one that outguns all nations except for Russia and the US. Yours on the other hand has left you a 28 year old third generation fighter that is ironically named "radiance".

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## tvsram1992

SinoSoldier said:


> Our dreams led us to rise from a dependent air force to one that outguns all nations except for Russia and the US. Yours on the other hand has left you a 28 year old third generation fighter that is ironically named "radiance".


You have only numerical superiority . Why are you crazy about 3rd generation fighter? I know the reason cuz u might never be able to come near to mki , rafale and fgfa .


----------



## antonius123

tvsram1992 said:


> You have only numerical superiority . Why are you crazy about 3rd generation fighter? I know the reason cuz u might never be able to come near to mki , rafale and fgfa .



What make you think mki, rafale and fgfa is better than J-10/J-11B, J-10B, and J-20?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

tvsram1992 said:


> You have only numerical superiority . Why are you crazy about 3rd generation fighter? I know the reason cuz u might never be able to come near to mki , rafale and fgfa .



Why the hell does the PLAAF want to come near the MKI, Rafale, and FGFA when it is already beyond it?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DARKY

SinoSoldier said:


> Why the hell does the PLAAF want to come near the MKI, Rafale, and FGFA when it is already beyond it?



According to who ?... you ?...

That's expected... after all you are a chin.


----------



## HavocHeaven

tbh im tired of this kind of news
if you believe its true, would you plz do us a favor to hold like half a year something until its inked?


----------



## AerospaceEngineer

DARKY said:


> According to who ?... you ?...
> 
> That's expected... after all you are a chin.




According to the reality!!!!

1. J-20 is currently under development.
2. J-10B is already in mass production!
3. It is already being confirmed that there is another 5th gen stealth fighter under developement at SAC, will first fly later this year.



Now, after all, what are you??

Some indians living in a world of denial?? In a world of dream land? In a world of ENVY??


----------



## amalakas

antonius123 said:


> What make you think mki, rafale and fgfa is better than J-10/J-11B, J-10B, and J-20?



Maybe because they are?


----------



## AerospaceEngineer

amalakas said:


> Maybe because they are?



prove it !!!!!


Maybe they are NOT???

If MKI is better than J-10B then why buy Rafale?

If Rafale is better than J-10B then why fund T-50???


If T-50 is " better " than J-20?? LOL, NAH, there is no if. T-50 is infeorior to J-20, every1 knows it !!!


----------



## Ammyy

AerospaceEngineer said:


> prove it !!!!!
> 
> 
> Maybe they are NOT???
> 
> If MKI is better than J-10B then why buy Rafale?
> 
> If Rafale is better than J-10B then why fund T-50???
> 
> 
> If T-50 is " better " than J-20?? LOL, NAH, there is no if. T-50 is infeorior to J-20, every1 knows it !!!



You cant even prove about engine of J10b and want proof for MKIs .. Awesome


----------



## Zabaniyah

AerospaceEngineer said:


> If MKI is better than J-10B then why buy Rafale?



The MKI is a heavy-class fighter intended for air superiority. 

Rafale is a medium-class multi-role fighter. 

Big difference!!



AerospaceEngineer said:


> If Rafale is better than J-10B then why fund T-50???



The T-50 is a 5th generation plane. Rafale is 4.5G.



AerospaceEngineer said:


> If T-50 is " better " than J-20?? LOL, NAH, there is no if. T-50 is infeorior to J-20, every1 knows it !!!



I am not sure why people jump into conclusions over the J-20. 

I mean, we don't know the technical specs of the J-20. Hell, we don't even know if it is a production prototype or a working prototype. 

Almost too little is known about the J-20. All we have to discuss about is um...pictures 

The T-50 on the other hand is also in prototype stages while at the same time we are seeing the F-22 Raptor flying high...

I'd say, both have a long way to go to match up against the US. We'll see

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DARKY

AerospaceEngineer said:


> According to the reality!!!!
> 
> 1. J-20 is currently under development.
> 2. J-10B is already in mass production!
> 3. It is already being confirmed that there is another 5th gen stealth fighter under developement at SAC, will first fly later this year.
> 
> 
> 
> Now, after all, what are you??
> 
> Some indians living in a world of denial?? In a world of dream land? In a world of ENVY??



We know they are making Alien UFOs.. and Death stars and Inter galactic cruisers but until then.. let us and the whole world live in denial/dreamland/ENVY.


----------



## Akasa

DARKY said:


> According to who ?... you ?...
> 
> That's expected... after all you are a chin.



According to the parameters of the J-10B, J-15, J-11B, J-20?

But of course, you would ignore everything and pretend they don't exist.

---------- Post added at 04:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:31 PM ----------




amalakas said:


> Maybe because they are?



In what aspect, appearance?

---------- Post added at 04:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:32 PM ----------




DRDO said:


> You cant even prove about engine of J10b and want proof for MKIs .. Awesome



Here, proof of J-10B engine:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Cl4V4ctJD...bofan+Engines+in+J-10B+Fighter+Je+%283%29.jpg

Now let's hear the proof of the Su-30MKI, oh wait, you have none.


----------



## nomi007

Harry Potter said:


> So PLAAF now wants Russian Su-35 fighters.
> This means Chinese 4.5 gen fighter jet projects have failed.


what non-sense
why you are buying rafael its meansu-30mki has been failed?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

Why India don't induct SU-35?


----------



## Zabaniyah

Guys, this is also reported on Flightglobal:



> China requests Sukhoi Su-35 fighter buy
> 
> China has asked Russia to supply it with Sukhoi Su-35 fighters and Almaz-Antei S-400 Triumph long-range air defence systems.
> 
> The Rossiyskaya Gazeta newspaper quoted Alexander Fomin, deputy head of Russia's Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation, as saying that Beijing filed requests for the equipment last year. "The Russian side is considering these applications," he said.
> 
> Fomin refused to specify how many fighters China is seeking to buy. Last year it cancelled an order for a second batch of 95 Su-27s for local assembly, after Shenyang launched series production of its comparable J-11 design. Four Su-35s have so far been delivered to the Russian air force to support trials activities, with the type expected to enter frontline use in 2013.
> 
> China has previously acquired S-300PMU2 "Favorit" air defence systems from Russia, and hopes to field next-generation S-400 surface-to-air missiles from 2015.



Source: China requests Sukhoi Su-35 fighter buy

---------- Post added at 12:19 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:18 AM ----------




wanglaokan said:


> Why India don't induct SU-35?



That's because they already have the MKI with Western avionics backed with the IAI Phalcon.


----------



## retaxis

China will be ruined RUIIIIINNNEED without those SU-35s what will we do? We might as well start by eating grass ruiined i tell you.


----------



## Secur

I am not buying this ... Why would China need another 4th Gen Fighter ? ... Or is this another of the Russian propaganda ( just like the carrier arresters earlier ) ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

DARKY said:


> What parameters ?... Oh.. I know the Chin paint job...
> 
> What parameters exactly ?
> Got any ?... do you ?.... or that same underdevelopment and defense forum insider BS.



The paint job includes composites and radar absorbent material. And then we have the AESA, the MAW, the IRST, the upgraded engines, new cockpit. Pretty much what you see in the Su-35 and Rafale itself.



DARKY said:


> What proof Do you want ?.... you can see what's available for your self and what needs to be seen.... all round a far better air-craft than what ever China field as of now and would in 10 years.



Better in what exactly? Target practice for the enemy? Because with the current state of its upgrades and systems, that's what it will be best at.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

tvsram1992 said:


> You always say can but u can never do
> We know how to stop water to Pakistan and Bangladesh and fulfill our needs if u do any such suicidal action and lol u are thinking of dehydrating us



Sure we can, we're just wait to use as bargain against South Tibet...The water valve can be tighten any time, remember this water on China's side is China property...we can do what ever we want.



> and u lost to mongols,manchus,and japanese
> see ur mirror before u look into others



Yes, half of Mongol is part of China..Manchu is part of China..manchuirans and Inner Mongolians are our brothers and sisters...you have prove nothing...as for Japaneses...they got nuked as rewards...someone revenge for us and we have clean hands...isn't that wonderfull.


----------



## DARKY

SinoSoldier said:


> The paint job includes *composites* and r*adar absorbent material*. And then we have the *AESA*, the* MAW*, the IRST, the upgraded engines, new cockpit. Pretty much what you see in the Su-35 and Rafale itself.



Any credible source to prove the claims or Its the same old poster BS... What's the power rating of AESA on J-11/J-10 and module count ?.... Does it have standoff jamming capability like Su30MKI ?... If yes.. what jammers used ?...

Won't ask about the engine part since your own pilot said about it not long time back.....





SinoSoldier said:


> Better in what exactly? Target practice for the enemy? Because with the current state of its upgrades and systems, that's what it will be best at.



Try targeting an aircraft with superior engine, avionics, Electronics, Jammers, weaponry, Kinematics performance, and far-better pilots... and that's at current stage... not talking of upgrades of which the 1st batch would start arriving by year end... or early next year.


----------



## Akasa

DARKY said:


> Any credible source to prove the claims or Its the same old poster BS... What's the power rating of AESA on J-11/J-10 and module count ?.... Does it have standoff jamming capability like Su30MKI ?... If yes.. what jammers used ?...
> 
> Won't ask about the engine part since your own pilot said about it not long time back.....




How about CAC employees. As far as I know the stuff they released are far more accurate than any Western source or other Chinese sources so far. The AESA on the J-11B are greater than 1200 modules although we do not know the number. The individual modules allow the J-11B's radar to jam, a portion of the modules can be allotted for that. Seeing how the J-11B has more powerful powerplants, the power rating of the AESA is dependent on its platform, not the AESA itself.

I can show you pictures of the J-11Bs with WS-10 engines. And as far as I know no pilot ever mentioned it.




DARKY said:


> Try targeting an aircraft with superior engine, avionics, Electronics, Jammers, weaponry, Kinematics performance, and far-better pilots... and that's at current stage... not talking of upgrades of which the 1st batch would start arriving by year end... or early next year.



Superior engine? In what? Lower thrust? Avionics? The Su-30MKI's and Rafale's radar have a lower channel count than the J-11B, and with the J-11B employing more powerful powerplants, I expect its power rating to be higher as well. Jammers, as far as I know, are integrated separately int he Su-30MKI and with a smaller radar I don't know how you arrived at the theory that the Rafale will have better jammers. And have you seen PLAAF pilots? If not, then you have no basis for that theory. Kinematic performance will be in J-11B's favor simply due to more powerful engines and a lighter airframe.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## NirmalKrish

nomi007 said:


> what non-sense
> why you are buying rafael its meansu-30mki has been failed?



What logic your an epic fail like your counterparts on this thread.


----------



## Hello_10

PEACEMAKER2010 said:


> China hopes to acquire new Russian S-400 Triumph air defense system by 2015, but only the question of delivery of Su-35 fighters to this country is being discussed at the moment, Rossiyskaya Gazeta reports.
> 
> "The Chinese party has shown interest in acquisition of a number of Su-35 jets and submitted a proposal to us in 2011. At present this problem is being elaborated by the designated institution of Russia", - said the First Deputy Director General of Federal Service of Military-Technical Cooperation, Alexander Fomin.
> 
> Speaking of prospects of air defense systems deliveries to China, Fomin has reminded that during a period from 1993 to 2010 a large number of Russian air defense missile systems, including S-300PMU2 &#8220;Favorit&#8221;, have been delivered to China.
> 
> "As for further cooperation with China in the area of air defense, at present the Chinese partners are showing interest in acquisition of next-generation S-400 Triumph air defense systems. They want to acquire the first batch in 2015", - Fomin said.
> 
> According to Fomin, the prospects of deliveries of S-400 Triumph air defense systems to China may be defined in proportion to deliveries of these systems to the Russian armed forces.
> 
> "At present the construction of additional capacities for production of S-400 Triumph air defense systems is being carried out. China has not shown interest in acquisition of other Russian air defense systems yet", - Fomin said.
> 
> Russia will deliver Su-35 fighters and Triumph air defense systems to China


 
*Only enemies of enemy can be defined as the best friends.* Russia knows, Russia or mainly many other developing countries can live peacefully only until China is capable enough to engage US/West. and longer China is capable enough to resist US/ West, better it is for those countries who are always threatened with the policy makers of US/ West. days of Western superiority is numbered and they are worried of this dramatic change. western aggression/ their efforts to take over the whole world one by one before the world may get completely changed, can&#8217;t be resisted without a powerful China. Hence, whatever help China needs for doing this, would be given to them


----------



## rcrmj

NirmalKrish said:


> What logic your an epic fail like your counterparts on this thread.


the fact is India cannt make modern plan as simple as that, prove otherwise


----------



## tvsram1992

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Sure we can, we're just wait to use as bargain against South Tibet...The water valve can be tighten any time, remember this water on China's side is China property...we can do what ever we want.


You can try if u wanna lose North Tawang



> Yes, half of Mongol is part of China..Manchu is part of China..manchuirans and Inner Mongolians are our brothers and sisters...you have prove nothing...


The same applies to our muslims and christians . How funny would it be if i mention Mongols and Manchus are ur masters


> *as for Japaneses...they got nuked as rewards*...someone revenge for us and we have clean hands...isn't that wonderfull.


wtf are u talking? do u have mind? They got nuked because they attacked you .


----------



## Hello_10

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> A great fighter on the paper only indeed!!!



See, we usually see even Jf17 beating F16 block52 on PDF while China itself don&#8217;t buy JF17 and produce J10s only. while, one day I asked on PDF, &#8220;why do Pakistan pay twice for F16 block 52 than J10s while F16s also come with many US&#8217;s political strings attached with it?&#8221; not only Pakistani members but even Indian sources claim that their LCA mk2 will be even in comparison to Rafale F3 but its obvious that India won&#8217;t pay over 2 times for Rafale if the claims are true. Similarly, except Chinese source, I haven&#8217;t read J10s superior than even F16 block 52 anywhere while F16 block 52 was of the generation of Mirage2000-5 mk2 while production line of Rafale was opened as a &#8216;next gen option&#8217;, 4++, when French closed production lines of Mirage2000. I also argued many times, &#8220;why Indian defense experts were agreed to pay over $70mil for just upgrading their old Mirage2000s while F16 block52 was offered to IAF since 2006, at a lesser price than what they are paying for upgrading of Mirage2000?&#8221; *We always have enough comparison among all the 4th gen aircrafts but the certain differences do exist.* But about Su35BM/ SU30MKIs, it is considered as the biggest threat for US right now, while measuring comparative performance of latest US&#8217;s aircrafts 



> Part of the presentation showed a computer simulation which calculated that the F-35 would be consistently defeated by the Russian-made SU-35 fighter aircraft. The defeat calculated by the scenario also showed the loss of the F-35's supporting airborne-early warning and air-to-air refueling aircraft.
> 
> Independent air combat analysts from Air Power Australia have also stated that the F-35 is not capable of facing high end threats; that what will be delivered (if it ever arrives) will be obsolete; and that the F-35 is not affordable or sustainable.
> 
> http://www.f-16.net/news_article4416.html


Similarly S-400 is among the high end side of air defense and Russia won&#8217;t export it so easily, even if China wants it they may have to wait for it for next 4-5 years until Russia may reach final stage of development of S-500. But yes Chinese arm industry has been improved enough till now and we hope they would produce one of the best aircrafts and other defense arms after just 8 to 10 years from now. But as US is itself struggling with development of F35, while it is believed that F22 is good due to having stealth techs only but it lacks many other 'competent' capabilities for what their engineers are struggling with F35 also right now, therefore, it is still doubtful how much Russia or China will be able to make a better 5th gen stealth aircraft than US&#8217;s, as, US&#8217;s arm industry isn&#8217;t backward to either Russia or China . US is facing serious problems with F35 at its final stage of development while Russia and China are still on the early stage of development of their 5th gen aircrafts? 

Hence, I would advice China to buy as many Su35 and S-400 as they can and then they would try for something the best by themselves also. And why not, Russia/ SU has been the only source of defense techs for China in past, whether for 2nd gen aircrafts like Mig21 or 4th gen Su27 etc, till now China always copied Russian tech, so why not now. But yes, everyone copy others techs, Japanese copy German techs and German copy Japanese/ US&#8217;s techs. And we hope China will be able to make something soon which others will copy from China in future. All the best


----------



## killerx

wow that good now indian SU30MKI is would be think twice invading chinas air space


----------



## DARKY

SinoSoldier said:


> How about CAC employees. As far as I know the stuff they released are far more accurate than any Western source or other Chinese sources so far. The AESA on the J-11B are greater than 1200 modules although we do not know the number. The individual modules allow the J-11B's radar to jam, a portion of the modules can be allotted for that. Seeing how the J-11B has more powerful powerplants, the power rating of the AESA is dependent on its platform, not the AESA itself.
> 
> I can show you pictures of the J-11Bs with WS-10 engines. And as far as I know no pilot ever mentioned it.



No the power ratings are primarily dependent on the Radar Itself... the power plant comes as secondary after cooling.
The PLAAF pilot publically complained about lack of Thrust and poor acceleration performances besides the low TBO and serviceability issues which have surfaced from time to time.

Better Show me a picture of J-11B with AESA... or have you seen for yourself.. or your military insider ?




SinoSoldier said:


> Superior engine? In what? Lower thrust? Avionics? The Su-30MKI's and Rafale's radar have a lower channel count than the J-11B, and with the J-11B employing more powerful powerplants, I expect its power rating to be higher as well. Jammers, as far as I know, are integrated separately int he Su-30MKI and with a smaller radar I don't know how you arrived at the theory that the Rafale will have better jammers. And have you seen PLAAF pilots? If not, then you have no basis for that theory. Kinematic performance will be in J-11B's favor simply due to more powerful engines and a lighter airframe.



Superior engine in terms of better core temperature, Higher sustained thrust without using AB, better acceleration performances, Higher TBO, Higher service life, TVC, to name a few.
You can compare the color of flame produced by J-11B engine and Su30MKI engine to give you an idea of core and Inlet temperature.

What made you conclude that Su30MKI radar have lower channel count ?.... Rafale radar is smaller due to nose size... while Su30MKI radar is 990mm biggest in all flanker varies and all combat planes.... and the channel count is about 1700 modules/phase shifters

Yes I have seen PLAAF pilots.. none pull out a supersonic thanche.. or on axis turns or a high speed split... If they do.. then show me a video of J-11 pulling 80degress AOA at high speed....


----------



## tvsram1992

killerx said:


> wow that good now indian SU30MKI is would be think twice invading chinas air space


and PAKFA will think once to attack China twice


----------



## Hello_10

killerx said:


> wow that good now indian SU30MKI is would be think twice invading chinas air space



It is always advised to India on the international platform for not to create problems for China, until they face any real threat from China, at the same time there is no proof that China was ever interested in getting engaged with India directly, even in 1972 or 1999 war between India-Pak, China had almost zero interests with India. So it is believed that China won&#8217;t get engaged with India until they will really have to, as even on the border issues, there is no sign that China ever tried to fight with India since 1962.

China would always be put on the front against US and yes China can do the work if we all support them . Just have a look on the number of political problems/ wars etc on the international platform, China always proves itself worthy for the developing nations for putting a good resistance against US/ West. Whatever work India or Russia won&#8217;t like to do, like transferring different defense techs etc to anti US countries, China does it freely and make it easy for the rest of the world to have a power balance in world . Russia believes in a power balance in this world which isn&#8217;t possible without putting a powerful China against US/ West. Even on the trade level, in WTO etc, we find BRICS is almost nothing without China. China creates as much problems to the Western aggression, on war and trade front both, that they just don&#8217;t get enough time to think about other countries like India. Even if Indian companies could grow so freely during last 20 years then they also got enough help from China. As, when China copy a technology, they make if so cheaply with mass production of it that West never thought what happened next to those techs, making it very easy for the Indian companies also to do research on those techs. (And yes Indian companies were also benefitted by those Indian professionals who first performed excellent for different Western MNCs and then they worked for Indian companies with bringing their experiences and developed high techs for them.) *until China will remain the enemy number one for US/ West, they will consider the country like India good.* Just look on the dramas about Syria/ Iran, can India support Iran and Syria if China/ Russia start supporting US? The answer is simply No,, then how is it advisable to engage a country like China on regional politics if the developing world wants China on the international platform?

I remember, even if Russia wasn&#8217;t getting good money but they preferred to transfer even the whole production line of SU27 to China in late 90s when Russian economy suffered a serious loss in between 1990 to 1999. It was because, even if China is a neighboring country of Russia and have also fought with Russia in past, today we find West/ US so friendly with Russia/ India only because now China is their number one enemy, otherwise till Cold War, it was Russia+India on the gun point of US . *US/ West always have someone on their gun point and their policy makers always try to get something done somewhere, either this or that way. and as they are worried for this dramaticaly changing world, its the good luck for the country like India that there is a China.* What I told to Indian members many times, if China might not be so big threat to US, US wasn&#8217;t going to offer their best arms to India . And if China may proves itself to be capable enough to even beat US&#8217;s arms, we will see US to be willing to sell whatever defense arms they have to India, as we see right now also .

*There is an excessive benefits of Rise of China for most of non NATO countries including India/ Russia and yes China is doing a very good job, we just have to keep supporting China's rise *

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Akasa

DARKY said:


> No the power ratings are primarily dependent on the Radar Itself... the power plant comes as secondary after cooling.
> The PLAAF pilot publically complained about lack of Thrust and poor acceleration performances besides the low TBO and serviceability issues which have surfaced from time to time.
> 
> Better Show me a picture of J-11B with AESA... or have you seen for yourself.. or your military insider ?



There is no point in having a large radar power rating if you can't deliver enough juice. Anyways, seeing how they have managed to pack the modules efficiently and thoroughly and their experience in such radars, I think their power ratings should be decent purely on a technological basis.

As far as I know the WS-10A specifications according to the airshow was 132 kN, higher than that of the Al-31, and also has a longer service hour. What you are referring to are the original ones that have already been fixed.

The J-11B's AESA was confirmed by military insiders as well as a recent exhibition. You can believe it or not but so far almost all of the information talked by the insiders have been accurate. If they were able to announce the J-20 two years in advanced, I have no doubt their AESA talk are accurate as well.



DARKY said:


> Superior engine in terms of better core temperature, Higher sustained thrust without using AB, better acceleration performances, Higher TBO, Higher service life, TVC, to name a few.
> You can compare the color of flame produced by J-11B engine and Su30MKI engine to give you an idea of core and Inlet temperature.
> 
> What made you conclude that Su30MKI radar have lower channel count ?.... Rafale radar is smaller due to nose size... while Su30MKI radar is 990mm biggest in all flanker varies and all combat planes.... and the channel count is about 1700 modules/phase shifters
> 
> Yes I have seen PLAAF pilots.. none pull out a supersonic thanche.. or on axis turns or a high speed split... If they do.. then show me a video of J-11 pulling 80degress AOA at high speed....



We do not know the non afterburning thrusts of the WS-10 or Al-31, so hold off until we get further information. Acceleration depends on thrust to weight ratio, and with the J-11B's airframe being 700 kg lighter than other Flanker due to composites, the J-11B's thrust to weight ratio will be much higher than that of the Su-30MKI. The J-11B engine produces a blue flame. PLAAF never publicizes its exercises, so we do not know whether they did those stunts or not. The Su-30MKI uses a Zhuk AE, the base variant of which uses 680 modules. The largest variant uses 1000 modules, but that is still lower than that of the J-10B's radar, which is smaller than the one used on PLAAF heavy fighters

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DARKY

SinoSoldier said:


> There is no point in having a large radar power rating if you can't deliver enough juice. Anyways, seeing how they have managed to pack the modules efficiently and thoroughly and their experience in such radars, I think their power ratings should be decent purely on a technological basis.
> 
> As far as I know the WS-10A specifications according to the airshow was 132 kN, higher than that of the Al-31, and also has a longer service hour. What you are referring to are the original ones that have already been fixed.
> 
> The J-11B's AESA was confirmed by military insiders as well as a recent exhibition. You can believe it or not but so far almost all of the information talked by the insiders have been accurate. If they were able to announce the J-20 two years in advanced, I have no doubt their AESA talk are accurate as well.



The efficiency of a Radar is determined with Power and Aperture product... you need to have modules with higher rating.. the GaAs transistors can't deliver as high power as a GaN transistor... do you know how much power the engine produces in comparison to what is required by the Radar... and other electronics ?

Al-31 have different variants... Al-31FN-M3 produces thrust as high as 155kN... which would be installed on Su30MKI as the upgrade.

Nothing new with that... even I predicted Russians to show their plane by 2009-10.



SinoSoldier said:


> We do not know the non afterburning thrusts of the WS-10 or Al-31, so hold off until we get further information. Acceleration depends on thrust to weight ratio, and with the J-11B's airframe being 700 kg lighter than other Flanker due to composites, the J-11B's thrust to weight ratio will be much higher than that of the Su-30MKI. The J-11B engine produces a blue flame. PLAAF never publicizes its exercises, so we do not know whether they did those stunts or not. The Su-30MKI uses a Zhuk AE, the base variant of which uses 680 modules. The largest variant uses 1000 modules, but that is still lower than that of the J-10B's radar, which is smaller than the one used on PLAAF heavy fighters



Acceleration depends of fuel burn rate performance, T/W ratio of Engine, Amount of air Intake, core and intake temperature.. etc..Al-31 T/W ratio for the later variants is 10 and for WS-10 its 9.... the latest variants of Al-31 has T/W ratio as high as 10.5...

Show me the picture of J-11B with After Burners.

Neither does IAF publicize its exercise... but they pull 80+ degrees AOA with Su30 in public.. PLAAF too shows maneuvers with J-10.... show me a similar public performance of J-11.. If you don't have of any exercise.

Su30MKI doesn't use Zhuk AE... But It would be upgraded with Zhuk ASE with 1700 T/R modules rated at 20/25 watts per channel... even BARs has around 1700 modules.


----------



## Akasa

DARKY said:


> The efficiency of a Radar is determined with Power and Aperture product... you need to have modules with higher rating.. the GaAs transistors can't deliver as high power as a GaN transistor... do you know how much power the engine produces in comparison to what is required by the Radar... and other electronics ?
> 
> Al-31 have different variants... Al-31FN-M3 produces thrust as high as 155kN... which would be installed on Su30MKI as the upgrade.
> 
> Nothing new with that... even I predicted Russians to show their plane by 2009-10.



And how do you know that the Su-30MKI's has higher power rating than the one on the J-11B?

The engine you mentioned has a maximum thrust of 14.5 tons, not 155 kN, and show me the source that said what you said.





DARKY said:


> Acceleration depends of fuel burn rate performance, T/W ratio of Engine, Amount of air Intake, core and intake temperature.. etc..Al-31 T/W ratio for the later variants is 10 and for WS-10 its 9.... the latest variants of Al-31 has T/W ratio as high as 10.5...
> 
> Show me the picture of J-11B with After Burners.
> 
> Neither does IAF publicize its exercise... but they pull 80+ degrees AOA with Su30 in public.. PLAAF too shows maneuvers with J-10.... show me a similar public performance of J-11.. If you don't have of any exercise.
> 
> Su30MKI doesn't use Zhuk AE... But It would be upgraded with Zhuk ASE with 1700 T/R modules rated at 20/25 watts per channel... even BARs has around 1700 modules.



Acceleration of the aircraft is decided by the aircraft thrust to weight ratio since the airframes play a big part. The J-11B uses a lightened airframe that saves over 700 kg. So far the Su-30MKI hasn't incorporated that kind of lightening yet.

ImageShack® - Online Photo and Video Hosting

So then we can not say the J-11B can't do the maneuvers the Su-30MKI did.

The ASE was an estimate and it is not built yet; and show me the source


----------



## DARKY

SinoSoldier said:


> And how do you know that the Su-30MKI's has higher power rating than the one on the J-11B?
> 
> The engine you mentioned has a maximum thrust of 14.5 tons, not 155 kN, and show me the source that said what you said.




Power aperture product of Bars stand at 36-38dBWm2... I leave you for comparison... The Al-31FN-M-2 has 145kN and Al-31FN-M-3 has thrust figures as High as 150kN+5kN to be used on purpose.




SinoSoldier said:


> Acceleration of the aircraft is decided by the aircraft thrust to weight ratio since the airframes play a big part. The J-11B uses a lightened airframe that saves over 700 kg. So far the Su-30MKI hasn't incorporated that kind of lightening yet.
> 
> ImageShack® - Online Photo and Video Hosting
> 
> So then we can not say the J-11B can't do the maneuvers the Su-30MKI did.
> 
> The ASE was an estimate and it is not built yet; and show me the source



The T/W ratio of engines matters more.
I asked about J-11B picture with Afterburners not some random engine photo.
Yes J-11B cannot do such maneuvers... clearly incapable and not build for such thing.
ASE is currently being put on Su30MKI as we speak... you can look any where on internet.... the calculation of Zhuk-AE for 990mm nose would give you figures around 1700... If improvements in packing wouldn't have improved in all these years.


----------



## Akasa

DARKY said:


> Power aperture product of Bars stand at 36-38dBWm2... I leave you for comparison... The Al-31FN-M-2 has 145kN and Al-31FN-M-3 has thrust figures as High as 150kN+5kN to be used on purpose.



And yet you did not post the source that said the Su-30MKI will use these engines.






DARKY said:


> The T/W ratio of engines matters more.
> I asked about J-11B picture with Afterburners not some random engine photo.
> Yes J-11B cannot do such maneuvers... clearly incapable and not build for such thing.
> ASE is currently being put on Su30MKI as we speak... you can look any where on internet.... the calculation of Zhuk-AE for 990mm nose would give you figures around 1700... If improvements in packing wouldn't have improved in all these years.



Just because you haven't seen J-11B do these maneuvers doesn't mean it is not able to do so. Heck, we have not even seen the J-10 drop weapons yet, so you automatically assume that it can't? I posted photos of the J-11B engines. The thrust to weight ratio of an engine does not matter; an engine with thrust to weight ratio of 10 in a 16 ton aircraft will still provide less maneuverability than an engine with thrust to weight of 6 in a 7 ton aircraft. I looked everywhere and I did not read that the Su-30MKI was getting ASE.


----------



## ejaz007

[*SIZE=5]Russia Close to Sign Su-35 Fighter Deal With China[/SIZE]*


Russia and China may soon sign a $4-bln contract on the delivery of 48 Sukhoi Su-35 Flanker-E fighter jets to the Chinese air force, Russias Kommersant business daily said on Tuesday.

The sides have practically agreed on the delivery of 48 Su-35 multirole fighters, worth $4 billion, to China, Kommersant said citing a source in the Russian defense industry.

According to the paper, the only obstacle remaining is Moscows demand that Beijing should guarantee the protection of copyrights on the production of Su-35s without proper licensing.

Moscow is not only aiming to ensure its presence on the Chinese [combat aircraft] market, but also attempting to prevent the potential copycat production of Russian aircraft for subsequent sales to third parties with predatory pricing, a Russian government source told Kommesant.

China has a poor record concerning copycat manufacturing of advanced Russian combat aircraft.

Russian experts claim that Chinese Chengdu J-10 fighter is a copy of Su-27 Flanker, Shenyang J-11 is a replica of Su-30 Flanker-C, and FC-1 is a copy of MiG-29 Fulcrum.

The Su-35, powered by two 117S engines with thrust vectoring, combines high maneuverability and the capability to effectively engage several air targets simultaneously using both guided and unguided missiles and weapon systems.

The aircraft has been touted as "4++ generation using fifth-generation technology."


Russia Close to Sign Su-35 Fighter Deal With China | World | RIA Novosti


----------



## AerospaceEngineer

ejaz007 said:


> [*SIZE=5]Russia Close to Sign Su-35 Fighter Deal With China[/SIZE]*
> 
> 
> Russia and China may soon sign a $4-bln contract on the delivery of 48 Sukhoi Su-35 Flanker-E fighter jets to the Chinese air force, Russia&#8217;s Kommersant business daily said on Tuesday.
> 
> &#8220;The sides have practically agreed on the delivery of 48 Su-35 multirole fighters, worth $4 billion, to China,&#8221; Kommersant said citing a source in the Russian defense industry.
> 
> According to the paper, the only obstacle remaining is Moscow&#8217;s demand that Beijing should guarantee the protection of copyrights on the production of Su-35s without proper licensing.
> 
> &#8220;Moscow is not only aiming to ensure its presence on the Chinese [combat aircraft] market, but also attempting to prevent the potential copycat production of Russian aircraft for subsequent sales to third parties with predatory pricing,&#8221; a Russian government source told Kommesant.
> 
> China has a poor record concerning copycat manufacturing of advanced Russian combat aircraft.
> 
> Russian experts claim that Chinese Chengdu J-10 fighter is a copy of Su-27 Flanker, Shenyang J-11 is a replica of Su-30 Flanker-C, and FC-1 is a copy of MiG-29 Fulcrum.
> 
> The Su-35, powered by two 117S engines with thrust vectoring, combines high maneuverability and the capability to effectively engage several air targets simultaneously using both guided and unguided missiles and weapon systems.
> 
> The aircraft has been touted as "4++ generation using fifth-generation technology."
> 
> 
> Russia Close to Sign Su-35 Fighter Deal With China | World | RIA Novosti






Are you FU@@ING out ouf your mind?? J-10 is a copy of SU-27???

LOL, this news is nothing but pure B.S !!!!

Oh, just wait until 2012. The deal "will" be signed, then 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 ..........................................


----------



## qwerrty

> *Russia Close to Sign Su-35 Fighter Deal With China
> 
> Russian experts claim that Chinese Chengdu J-10 fighter is a copy of Su-27 Flanker*, Shenyang J-11 is a replica of Su-30 Flanker-C, and *FC-1 is a copy of MiG-29 Fulcrum*. http://en.rian.ru/world/20120306/171780246.html



so this is confirmed BS..
LOL @ the so called russian experts 
i can understand why many people here don't take stuff from russian mouths seriously.


----------



## Zabaniyah

ejaz007 said:


> *Russian experts claim that Chinese Chengdu J-10 fighter is a copy of Su-27 Flanker, Shenyang J-11 is a replica of Su-30 Flanker-C, and FC-1 is a copy of MiG-29 Fulcrum.*



Really? Are those 'experts' really experts?


----------



## 帅的一匹

PLAAF will buy 48 SU-35 super flanker at cost of 85millions per unit. When we get Su-35, India's MKI will be out of date. India buy Rafale and we buy SU-35 to respond. No one will believe Rafale could take on SU-35. When we get the technology of Su-35, we will apply it to our J11B for further improvement. Russian need money and we give them, that's easy. Most importantly,we can get Thrust vectoring Engine tech through this procurement.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

wanglaokan said:


> PLAAF will buy 48 SU-35 super flanker at cost of 85millions per unit. When we get Su-35, India's MKI will be out of date. India buy Rafale and we buy SU-35 to respond. No one will believe Rafale could take on SU-35. When we get the technology of Su-35, we will apply it to our J11B for further improvement. Russian need money and we give them, that's easy. Most importantly,we can get Thrust vectoring Engine tech through this procurement.



There are only minor part of improvement that we need from Su-35S, not engine nor radar.

J-11B already has AESA and TVC engine, moreover with more composite materials for partial stealth feature.


----------



## ziaulislam

such news from russians sources are always wrong..i am pretty sure that chinese wouldnt buy any jet from russians again..and so far it seems to be true..
regarding s-400, that is a possiblity but a distant one..
to be honest chinese have nearly catched up the russians in every field...


----------



## DARKY

SinoSoldier said:


> And yet you did not post the source that said the Su-30MKI will use these engines.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just because you haven't seen J-11B do these maneuvers doesn't mean it is not able to do so. Heck, we have not even seen the J-10 drop weapons yet, so you automatically assume that it can't? I posted photos of the J-11B engines. The thrust to weight ratio of an engine does not matter; an engine with thrust to weight ratio of 10 in a 16 ton aircraft will still provide less maneuverability than an engine with thrust to weight of 6 in a 7 ton aircraft. I looked everywhere and I did not read that the Su-30MKI was getting ASE.



You won't get the upgrades dished out in a source link.... It Includes a new engine, AESA, next gen. EW suit, Newer weapon package, new cockpit design and a lighter airframe.... You want source for ASE....  our defense minister said about this in Parliament.

J-11B is *Incapable* of performing such maneuvers as It doesn't have Canards and TVC on engins.


----------



## DARKY

T/W ratio of engins matters a lot when same class planes are considered you are acting like fool when you say airframe weight is more important..... Not only does it affects the accelaration properties but also helps in better performance and increase life along with better fuel burn rate.... Developers spend years reducing weight as low 50kg to acheive the desired performance... As for the engine photo posted by you why can't show it like that on J-11B photo.... Ask the Insider who gave you that photo may be that would help.


----------



## j20blackdragon

You don't need Su-35 or Rafale when you have this.


----------



## FairAndUnbiased

DARKY said:


> T/W ratio of engins matters a lot when same class planes are considered you are acting like fool when you say airframe weight is more important..... Not only does it affects the accelaration properties but also helps in better performance and increase life along with better fuel burn rate.... Developers spend years reducing weight as low 50kg to acheive the desired performance... As for the engine photo posted by you why can't show it like that on J-11B photo.... Ask the Insider who gave you that photo may be that would help.



wrong. only total thrust-weight matters. do you have an engine firing in free space?


----------



## Speeder 2

DARKY said:


> ...You want source for ASE....  our defense minister said about this in Parliament.
> 
> .



So no 39% of NASA scientists are Indians, 33% of Docs in the US are indians, etc...? then of course, that's what your ministers have been capable of doing in Canadian parliament...


----------



## DARKY

FairAndUnbiased said:


> wrong.



For China yes..... rest of the world no.



FairAndUnbiased said:


> only total thrust-weight matters. do you have an engine firing in free space.



You didn't read what was written in the post you quoted...... and parroted the same rant again.... typical of your types.


----------



## DARKY

wanglaokan said:


> PLAAF will buy 48 SU-35 super flanker at cost of 85millions per unit. When we get Su-35, India's MKI will be out of date. India buy Rafale and we buy SU-35 to respond. No one will believe Rafale could take on SU-35. When we get the technology of Su-35, we will apply it to our J11B for further improvement. Russian need money and we give them, that's easy. Most importantly,we can get Thrust vectoring Engine tech through this procurement.


 
The upgraded Su30MKI costs 102-108 million USD.


----------



## Speeder 2

DARKY said:


> The upgraded Su30MKI costs 102-108 million USD.



You know what, I just want to take a photo of those Ruskies who are laughing to the bank, and tell them "congradulations, you've made it again! "

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## HavocHeaven

How about we have a bet on this SU-35 deal? Between Indian buddies in this thread and us Chinese. Something like $100 each person, pay via Paypal.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

HavocHeaven said:


> How about we have a bet on this SU-35 deal? Between Indian buddies in this thread and us Chinese. Something like $100 each person, pay via Paypal.



Because Russia wants India to buy more of their fighters, so they just bring up China as a token to convince them to buy more.

And the credibility of the source is hardly reliable considering the quote like this. 



> Russia has its bottom line. *Thus, the Chinese fighter J-10 is, in fact, a copy of Russian Su-27, J-11 &#8211; an analogue of the Su-30 and FC-1 copies from the MiG-29.* &#8220;In this case all Russian planes are in the possession of Chinese engineers,&#8221; said a source from Russian government.


----------



## Akasa

DARKY said:


> You won't get the upgrades dished out in a source link.... It Includes a new engine, AESA, next gen. EW suit, Newer weapon package, new cockpit design and a lighter airframe.... You want source for ASE....  our defense minister said about this in Parliament.
> 
> J-11B is *Incapable* of performing such maneuvers as It doesn't have Canards and TVC on engins.



Then where did you get the details of the upgrades? Fantasy? Your defense minister mentioned AESA, not ASE. What makes you think the J-11B won't be able to perform those maneuvers? The J-11B has a much higher thrust to weight ratio than the Su-30MKI.


----------



## Aramsogo

HavocHeaven said:


> How about we have a bet on this SU-35 deal? Between Indian buddies in this thread and us Chinese. Something like $100 each person, pay via Paypal.



Indians wont pay if they lose.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aramsogo

Chinese forums saying this is BS story. I'll donate $25 to Indian child hunger charity if I'm wrong. Not a bet, just saying I'll give money to India if I'm wrong.


----------



## conworldus

I think the su35 is a great buy for china. One of the best aircraft inthe world


----------



## Akasa

conworldus said:


> I think the su35 is a great buy for china. One of the best aircraft inthe world



Totally useless when they have the J-10B, J-15, J-11B.


----------



## 21 Dec 2012

SinoSoldier said:


> Totally useless when they have the J-10B, J-15, J-11B.


Su 35 has good technologies that the Chinese weren't able to ripoff earlier [because they didn't have it].
Like it's Radar. It also has undergone an extensive RCS reduction therapy. Though I doubt if the Chinese would be able to reverse engineer a radar that would be even comparable to IRBIS-E.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

21 Dec 2012 said:


> Su 35 has good technologies that the Chinese weren't able to ripoff earlier [because they didn't have it].
> Like it's Radar. It also has undergone an extensive RCS reduction therapy. Though I doubt if the Chinese would be able to reverse engineer a radar that would be even comparable to IRBIS-E.



Dude, China has its own AESA, does Su-35 have even equipped AESA so far?

Our engine has nothing to do with AL-31, but rather with F-100.


----------



## 21 Dec 2012

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> *Dude, China has its own AESA,* does Su-35 have even equipped AESA so far?
> 
> Our engine has nothing to do with AL-31, but rather with F-100.


Where?
Apart from some Chinese fanboys on CDF and PDF, I don't think anyone has seen it.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

21 Dec 2012 said:


> Where?
> Apart from some Chinese fanboys on CDF and PDF, I don't think anyone has seen it.



There is the official confirmation that even JF-17 can be immediately integrated for AESA.

Because we prefer to keep thing in low-profile, it doesn't mean that we don't have it.

Russia needs to work harder instead of bitching about China of stealing this and that.

In fact, we don't even value the current Russian technology that much.


----------



## Ammyy

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> There is the official confirmation that even JF-17 can be immediately integrated for AESA.
> 
> Because we prefer to keep thing in low-profile, it doesn't mean that we don't have it.
> 
> Russia needs to work harder instead of bitching about China of stealing this and that.
> 
> *In fact, we don't even value the current Russian technology that much.*



Still all Chinese fighters using Russian engine including JF17 

So first prove before this low profile excuse

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sasquatch

DRDO said:


> Still all Chinese fighters using Russian engine including JF17
> 
> So first prove before this low profile excuse



WS-13 for JF-17 and WS-10 J-10 replacing russian ones.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

DRDO said:


> Still all Chinese fighters using Russian engine including JF17
> 
> So first prove before this low profile excuse



JF-17 was started more than decade ago, the Russian engine is just served as a temporary substitution.

The WS-13 engine is nearly ready, then we don't need RD-93 anymore.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

21 Dec 2012 said:


> Su 35 has good technologies that the Chinese weren't able to ripoff earlier [because they didn't have it].
> Like it's Radar. It also has undergone an extensive RCS reduction therapy. Though I doubt if the Chinese would be able to reverse engineer a radar that would be even comparable to IRBIS-E.



The Chinese never ripped off anything. The J-10B, J-15, J-11B incorporate AESA, radar absorbent material, composites, IRST, MAW, that make the Su-35 redundant. China doesn't need the Irbis-e, as they have built AESA radar much earlier than Russia and multiple models too.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ammyy

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> JF-17 was started more than decade ago, the Russian engine is just served as a temporary substitution.
> 
> The WS-13 engine is nearly ready, then we don't need RD-93 anymore.



When they become operational then you can say them ready till then its just make up stories or fanboy stories.


----------



## Sasquatch

DRDO said:


> When they become operational then you can say them ready till then its just make up stories or fanboy stories.



Already using it during 2010, WS-13.


----------



## Ammyy

Hu Songshan said:


> Already using it during 2010, WS-13.



That was test flight


----------



## Sasquatch

DRDO said:


> That was test flight



And Operational.


----------



## Akasa

21 Dec 2012 said:


> Where?
> Apart from some Chinese fanboys on CDF and PDF, I don't think anyone has seen it.



http://www.centurychina.com/plaboard/uploads/J10B_AESA_RADAR_1.jpg
http://cnair.top81.cn/gallery/Y-8AEW.jpg
http://lh3.ggpht.com/cuteftpster/R9...P_8E/s800/13823659_2006122008360891568300.jpg
http://i.discuss.com.hk/d/attachments/day_110504/20110504_eaa05b1f8f573e7767efmY8W7ti5Ns67.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_htvjsmtPr.../2tVsO4b9VDs/s400/kj-200+internet+picture.jpg

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

DRDO said:


> That was test flight



The flight tests were all successful, nuff to say.


----------



## Ammyy

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The flight tests were all successful, nuff to say.



Same thing said in 2005 when engine tested on J10 and after 4 years China reveal that its not as per standard ?

As I said JF17 still rely of Russian engine so whenever Chinese engine not become operational all these are ..........

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

DRDO said:


> Same thing said in 2005 when engine tested on J10 and after 4 years China reveal that its not as per standard ?
> 
> As I said JF17 still rely of Russian engine so whenever Chinese engine not become operational all these are ..........



The test was started in 2006, not 2005, stop posting those erroneous information.

BTW, it is normal to pass a test of engine for 5-6 years, since China even started the WS-10 since late 80 or early 90, yet it was only successful until 2005.


----------



## Hideki Yukawa

Russian can only see money from Chinese, they cannot see the dangers of Chinese. I'm sure that PLA will copies these fighter jets and they can do not announce, that's Chinese style.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Hideki Yukawa said:


> Russian can only see money from Chinese, they cannot see the dangers of Chinese. I'm sure that PLA will copies these fighter jets and they can do not announce, that's Chinese style.



This fake news was first propagated by your big mouth Japanese media, it seems that you are just doing your job here.


----------



## sexy gun

This news is damning blow to the quality of fighters chinese military industrial complex is churning out.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AerospaceEngineer

sexy gun said:


> This news is damning blow to the quality of fighters chinese military industrial complex is churning out.



Nah, then tell me something about your SH@T LCA.

Your LCA is so good then why buy everything from other countries???


----------



## AerospaceEngineer

Here is something VERY interesting!


_____________________________________________________
Potential operators

South Korea was viewed in the early stages as a potential operator. Russia launched its Su-35 bid for South Korea's fighter procurement programme at the 1996 Seoul Air Show, and included the Su-37 in the proposal as well. For the bid, the proposed Su-35 would have used both a phased grid radar and AL-31FP vectoring-thrust engines; the aircraft would have been assembled in South Korea. The contract, worth roughly $5 billion, may have been partially financed through a debt reduction deal on money owed by Russia to South Korea.[48] In the end, the F-15K was chosen.[49]

Both the Brazilian Air Force, and Venezuelan Air Force have expressed interest in purchasing Su-35s to replace older aircraft.[50] On 23 May 2006, it was reported that Venezuela planned to purchase dozens of Su-30 and Su-35 fighters, and as many as 100 T-90 tanks; an order for 24 Su-35s was placed in October 2008.[51][52] The Su-35 participated in Brazil's F-X and F-X2 contests, the decision of which has been delayed several times.[53][54] In October 2009, Anatoly Isaikin, general director of Rosoboronexport, declared that the company would provide 120 fighters and a full technology transfer deal to Brazil.[55] In mid-2008, the Brazilian Air Force selected three finalists, none of them the Su-35,[56] however in January 2011, President Dilma Rousseff again postponed the acquisition.[57]

Since the early 1990s, an extensive sales arrangement of the Su-35 to China has been discussed; in 1995 Sukhoi officials announced their proposal to co-produce the Su-35 with China, on the condition that China agreed to purchase 120 aircraft.[58] However it has been alleged that the Russian Foreign Ministry had blocked both the sale of the Su-35 and Tupolev Tu-22M bombers over concerns regarding the arrangements surrounding Chinese production of the base Su-27.[59] In November 2010, it was reported that Rosoboronexport was ready to hold talks with China on the sale of Su-35 fighters.[60][61] In 2012, Russia and China are reported to be close to signing a contract for 48 Su-35 fighters. *According to the report, the only remaining obstacle is Moscows demand that Beijing guarantee proper licensing for the production of Su-35s*.[62]

In July 2008, Russia offered the Su-35 for sale to India, Malaysia and Algeria.[63] In late 2010, Libya was expected to sign a contract for the purchase of 12 Su-35s.[64][65] The civil war in Libya and the resulting military intervention caused Rosoboronexport to lose $4 billion in arranged contracts, including the Su-35.[66] Sukhoi approached US-aligned Australia in 2002, offering Su-30 family aircraft, and the Su-35 targeted as the prime "export" fighter.[67][68] Since 2008, other nations in the region have either acquired the Su-30 or exhibited interest in the Su-35 with Australia concerned that the RAAF F-35 will be "overmatched" if the Su-35 becomes the dominant opposition.[69]

Indonesia is also interested in the Su-35BM as a replacement for its F-5E/Fs.[70] Vietnam is also interested in the Su-35BM as a replacement for its Su-30s


Sukhoi Su-35 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
________________________________________________________

Hahaha, just wait a few days. When the Chinese officially say that: " We dont want to buy SU-35".

The Russian will say :" Dude to IP rights can not be ganreentee, *we REFUSE to sell SU-35 to CHINA*."

lol

---------- Post added at 09:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:29 PM ----------



---------- Post added at 09:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:31 PM ----------



---------- Post added at 09:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:31 PM ----------

Another interesting news.

Japan is begging US to sell F-35.

Due to this news, it is safe to say that the poor quality of fighters come out of japan, and F-3 is oficially DEAD !!!


----------



## ptldM3

What does "ganreentee", "oficially", and "dude to" mean?


----------



## DrSomnath999

ptldM3 said:


> What does "ganreentee", "oficially", and "dude to" mean?


well his english words make a jack sense


----------



## AerospaceEngineer

ptldM3 said:


> What does "ganreentee", "oficially", and "dude to" mean?




I do not make a living writing news. If my spelling is no good, you can always use Microsoft Word !!

Remember I am an engineer, I never cared about spelling!


----------



## DARKY

SinoSoldier said:


> Then where did you get the details of the upgrades? Fantasy? Your defense minister mentioned AESA, not ASE. What makes you think the J-11B won't be able to perform those maneuvers? The J-11B has a much higher thrust to weight ratio than the Su-30MKI.



Fedrodov called me personally and gave details..... Yes Antony said about AESA with Zhuk radar the likely candidate.... And considering the size of the nose of MKI the version is supposed to be the larger Zhuk-AE aka Zhuk-ASE which is made for flanker varient.... Now does it get in your extra IQ head ?
The engine offered is either 117C or Al-31FN-M-3/2... IAF insists on the latter since its varient is already being made in India and workers would adapt it more easily...... Remember that all Su30MKI will be upgraded all 160+ and the rest to follow totalling 272.

About J-11B didn't you read what I wrote in the earlier post ? F-16 varients have even better T/W ratio yet its incapable.


----------



## HavocHeaven

DRDO said:


> When they become operational then you can say them ready till then its just make up stories or fanboy stories.



Since 2010 newly built J-11B/J-11BS are all equipped with WS-10 engines.


----------



## HavocHeaven

I am fed up with all these Indian craps.

If China inks any SU-35 deals in six months ("near future"), I will donate $100 to an Indian charity organization and post scanned receipt; Otherwise, you guys donate $100 to a Chinese charity account. 

I challenge all you Indians in this thread, officially.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Akasa

DARKY said:


> Fedrodov called me personally and gave details..... Yes Antony said about AESA with Zhuk radar the likely candidate.... And considering the size of the nose of MKI the version is supposed to be the larger Zhuk-AE aka Zhuk-ASE which is made for flanker varient.... Now does it get in your extra IQ head ?
> The engine offered is either 117C or Al-31FN-M-3/2... IAF insists on the latter since its varient is already being made in India and workers would adapt it more easily...... Remember that all Su30MKI will be upgraded all 160+ and the rest to follow totalling 272.
> 
> About J-11B didn't you read what I wrote in the earlier post ? F-16 varients have even better T/W ratio yet its incapable.



Can you post the link about Antony speaking about the ASE, or is it another one of those vague things?

The J-11B uses 132 kN engines and an airframe that is 700 kg lighter than the original. None of those are features of the F-16, so its thrust to weight ratio is anything but better.


----------



## AerospaceEngineer

It is written in Russian

The origional one and the treanslated one are below:

Russian:

____________________________________________________

&#1056;&#1086;&#1089;&#1089;&#1080;&#1103; &#1080; &#1050;&#1080;&#1090;&#1072;&#1081; &#1086;&#1073;&#1089;&#1091;&#1078;&#1076;&#1072;&#1102;&#1090; &#1086;&#1073;&#1083;&#1080;&#1082; &#1101;&#1082;&#1089;&#1087;&#1086;&#1088;&#1090;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1057;&#1091;-35
29-12-2010(), 12:00 &#1057;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1099; &#1050;&#1086;&#1084;&#1084;&#1077;&#1085;&#1090;&#1072;&#1088;&#1080;&#1080; (0) &#1040;&#1074;&#1090;&#1086;&#1088;: &#1040;&#1076;&#1084;&#1080;&#1085; 
&#1056;&#1086;&#1089;&#1089;&#1080;&#1103; &#1080; &#1050;&#1080;&#1090;&#1072;&#1081; &#1086;&#1073;&#1089;&#1091;&#1078;&#1076;&#1072;&#1102;&#1090; &#1086;&#1073;&#1083;&#1080;&#1082; &#1101;&#1082;&#1089;&#1087;&#1086;&#1088;&#1090;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1057;&#1091;-35&#1042;&#1086;&#1087;&#1088;&#1077;&#1082;&#1080; &#1089;&#1074;&#1086;&#1077;&#1081; &#1090;&#1088;&#1072;&#1076;&#1080;&#1094;&#1080;&#1080; &#1076;&#1077;&#1088;&#1078;&#1072;&#1090;&#1100; &#1050;&#1080;&#1090;&#1072;&#1081; &#1074; &#1089;&#1090;&#1086;&#1088;&#1086;&#1085;&#1077; &#1086;&#1090; &#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1076;&#1072;&#1078;&#1080; &#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1077;&#1081;&#1096;&#1080;&#1093; &#1074;&#1086;&#1086;&#1088;&#1091;&#1078;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1081; &#1056;&#1086;&#1089;&#1089;&#1080;&#1103; &#1076;&#1072;&#1083;&#1072; &#1087;&#1086;&#1085;&#1103;&#1090;&#1100; &#1086; &#1089;&#1074;&#1086;&#1077;&#1084; &#1085;&#1072;&#1084;&#1077;&#1088;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1080; &#1087;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074;&#1080;&#1090;&#1100; &#1087;&#1086;&#1089;&#1083;&#1077;&#1076;&#1085;&#1102;&#1102; &#1084;&#1086;&#1076;&#1077;&#1083;&#1100; &#1089;&#1074;&#1086;&#1077;&#1075;&#1086; &#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1077;&#1073;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1103; &#1057;&#1091;-35 &#1074; &#1101;&#1090;&#1091; &#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1072;&#1085;&#1091;.

&laquo;&#1052;&#1099; &#1075;&#1086;&#1090;&#1086;&#1074;&#1099; &#1088;&#1072;&#1073;&#1086;&#1090;&#1072;&#1090;&#1100; &#1089; &#1082;&#1080;&#1090;&#1072;&#1081;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1084;&#1080; &#1087;&#1072;&#1088;&#1090;&#1085;&#1077;&#1088;&#1072;&#1084;&#1080; &#1074; &#1101;&#1090;&#1086;&#1084; &#1085;&#1072;&#1087;&#1088;&#1072;&#1074;&#1083;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1080;&raquo;, &#1079;&#1072;&#1103;&#1074;&#1080;&#1083; &#1056;&#1048;&#1040; &#1053;&#1086;&#1074;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080; &#1079;&#1072;&#1084;&#1077;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1100; &#1076;&#1080;&#1088;&#1077;&#1082;&#1090;&#1086;&#1088;&#1072; &laquo;&#1056;&#1086;&#1089;&#1086;&#1073;&#1086;&#1088;&#1086;&#1085;&#1101;&#1082;&#1089;&#1087;&#1086;&#1088;&#1090;&#1072;&raquo; &#1040;&#1083;&#1077;&#1082;&#1089;&#1072;&#1085;&#1076;&#1088; &#1052;&#1080;&#1093;&#1077;&#1077;&#1074;. 

&#1054;&#1089;&#1085;&#1072;&#1097;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1081; &#1076;&#1074;&#1091;&#1084;&#1103; &#1076;&#1074;&#1080;&#1075;&#1072;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1103;&#1084;&#1080; 117&#1057; &#1089; &#1091;&#1087;&#1088;&#1072;&#1074;&#1083;&#1103;&#1077;&#1084;&#1099;&#1084; &#1074;&#1077;&#1082;&#1090;&#1086;&#1088;&#1086;&#1084; &#1090;&#1103;&#1075;&#1080; &#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1077;&#1073;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1100; &#1057;&#1091;-35 Flanker-E &#1086;&#1073;&#1083;&#1072;&#1076;&#1072;&#1077;&#1090; &#1074;&#1099;&#1089;&#1086;&#1082;&#1086;&#1081; &#1084;&#1072;&#1085;&#1077;&#1074;&#1088;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1100;&#1102; &#1089; &#1074;&#1086;&#1079;&#1084;&#1086;&#1078;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1100;&#1102; &#1087;&#1086;&#1088;&#1072;&#1078;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; &#1085;&#1077;&#1089;&#1082;&#1086;&#1083;&#1100;&#1082;&#1080;&#1093; &#1074;&#1086;&#1079;&#1076;&#1091;&#1096;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1094;&#1077;&#1083;&#1077;&#1081; &#1086;&#1076;&#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1088;&#1077;&#1084;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;, &#1077;&#1075;&#1086; &#1072;&#1088;&#1089;&#1077;&#1085;&#1072;&#1083; &#1089;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1086;&#1080;&#1090; &#1080;&#1079; &#1091;&#1087;&#1088;&#1072;&#1074;&#1083;&#1103;&#1077;&#1084;&#1099;&#1093; &#1080; &#1085;&#1077;&#1091;&#1087;&#1088;&#1072;&#1074;&#1083;&#1103;&#1077;&#1084;&#1099;&#1093; &#1074;&#1080;&#1076;&#1086;&#1074; &#1086;&#1088;&#1091;&#1078;&#1080;&#1103;.

&#1050;&#1072;&#1082; &#1086;&#1078;&#1080;&#1076;&#1072;&#1077;&#1090;&#1089;&#1103;, &#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1074;&#1099;&#1081; &#1089;&#1077;&#1088;&#1080;&#1081;&#1085;&#1099;&#1081; &#1084;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086;&#1092;&#1091;&#1085;&#1082;&#1094;&#1080;&#1086;&#1085;&#1072;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1099;&#1081; &#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1077;&#1073;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1100; &#1089;&#1086;&#1081;&#1076;&#1077;&#1090; &#1089;&#1086; &#1089;&#1073;&#1086;&#1088;&#1086;&#1095;&#1085;&#1086;&#1081; &#1083;&#1080;&#1085;&#1080;&#1080; &#1074; &#1082;&#1086;&#1085;&#1094;&#1077; &#1101;&#1090;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1075;&#1086;&#1076;&#1072;, &#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1074;&#1072;&#1103; &#1087;&#1072;&#1088;&#1090;&#1080;&#1103; &#1101;&#1090;&#1080;&#1093; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1086;&#1074; &#1073;&#1091;&#1076;&#1077;&#1090; &#1074;&#1099;&#1087;&#1091;&#1097;&#1077;&#1085;&#1072; &#1074; &#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1080;&#1086;&#1076; 2010-2015 &#1075;&#1086;&#1076;&#1086;&#1074;. &#1052;&#1077;&#1089;&#1090;&#1085;&#1099;&#1077; &#1057;&#1052;&#1048; &#1089;&#1086;&#1086;&#1073;&#1097;&#1072;&#1102;&#1090;&#65288;&#65289;, &#1095;&#1090;&#1086; &#1079;&#1072;&#1082;&#1072;&#1079; &#1089;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074;&#1083;&#1103;&#1077;&#1090; 48 &#1084;&#1072;&#1096;&#1080;&#1085;.&#65288;48&#21488;&#1084;&#1072;&#1096;&#1080;&#1085;&#1072;&#65292;&#1084;&#1072;&#1096;&#1080;&#1085;&#1072; Su35&#65289;

&#1052;&#1080;&#1093;&#1077;&#1077;&#1074; &#1089;&#1086;&#1086;&#1073;&#1097;&#1080;&#1083; &#1056;&#1048;&#1040; &#1053;&#1086;&#1074;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080;, &#1095;&#1090;&#1086; &#1074; &#1085;&#1072;&#1089;&#1090;&#1086;&#1103;&#1097;&#1077;&#1077; &#1074;&#1088;&#1077;&#1084;&#1103; &#1056;&#1086;&#1089;&#1089;&#1080;&#1103; &#1080; &#1050;&#1080;&#1090;&#1072;&#1081; &#1074;&#1077;&#1076;&#1091;&#1090; &#1085;&#1072;&#1095;&#1072;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1099;&#1081; &#1101;&#1090;&#1072;&#1087; &#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1077;&#1075;&#1086;&#1074;&#1086;&#1088;&#1086;&#1074; &#1080; &#1073;&#1091;&#1076;&#1091;&#1090; &#1086;&#1073;&#1089;&#1091;&#1078;&#1076;&#1072;&#1090;&#1100; &laquo;&#1086;&#1089;&#1086;&#1073;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080; &#1101;&#1082;&#1089;&#1087;&#1086;&#1088;&#1090;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1074;&#1072;&#1088;&#1080;&#1072;&#1085;&#1090;&#1072; &#1057;&#1091;-35 &#1080; &#1082;&#1072;&#1082; &#1080;&#1085;&#1090;&#1077;&#1075;&#1088;&#1080;&#1088;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1090;&#1100; &#1077;&#1075;&#1086; &#1089; &#1088;&#1072;&#1085;&#1077;&#1077; &#1087;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074;&#1083;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1084;&#1080; &#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1077;&#1073;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1103;&#1084;&#1080; &#1057;&#1091;-30 &#1080; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1072;&#1084;&#1080; &#1057;&#1091;-27 &#1082;&#1080;&#1090;&#1072;&#1081;&#1089;&#1082;&#1086;&#1081; &#1089;&#1073;&#1086;&#1088;&#1082;&#1080;&raquo;.

&#1057; 2008 &#1075;&#1086;&#1076;&#1072; &#1057;&#1091;-35 &#1087;&#1088;&#1077;&#1076;&#1083;&#1072;&#1075;&#1072;&#1077;&#1090;&#1089;&#1103; &#1048;&#1085;&#1076;&#1080;&#1080;, &#1052;&#1072;&#1083;&#1072;&#1081;&#1079;&#1080;&#1080;, &#1040;&#1083;&#1078;&#1080;&#1088;&#1091;, &#1041;&#1088;&#1072;&#1079;&#1080;&#1083;&#1080;&#1080; &#1080; &#1042;&#1077;&#1085;&#1077;&#1089;&#1091;&#1101;&#1083;&#1077;, &#1085;&#1086; &#1082;&#1086;&#1085;&#1090;&#1088;&#1072;&#1082;&#1090;&#1086;&#1074; &#1087;&#1086;&#1082;&#1072; &#1085;&#1077;&#1090;.

Defense News &#1094;&#1080;&#1090;&#1080;&#1088;&#1091;&#1077;&#1090; &#1087;&#1088;&#1077;&#1076;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1103; &laquo;&#1056;&#1086;&#1089;&#1086;&#1073;&#1086;&#1088;&#1086;&#1085;&#1101;&#1082;&#1089;&#1087;&#1086;&#1088;&#1090;&#1072;&raquo;, &#1095;&#1090;&#1086; &#1082;&#1086;&#1085;&#1090;&#1088;&#1072;&#1082;&#1090; &#1085;&#1072; &#1087;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074;&#1082;&#1091; &#1057;&#1091;-35 &#1074; &#1050;&#1080;&#1090;&#1072;&#1081; &#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1085;&#1077;&#1090; &#1082;&#1086;&#1085;&#1094;&#1086;&#1084; &#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1075;&#1085;&#1072;&#1094;&#1080;&#1080; &#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1076;&#1072;&#1078; &#1088;&#1086;&#1089;&#1089;&#1080;&#1081;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1093; &#1074;&#1086;&#1086;&#1088;&#1091;&#1078;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1081; &#1074; &#1050;&#1080;&#1090;&#1072;&#1081;. &#1042; &#1087;&#1086;&#1089;&#1083;&#1077;&#1076;&#1085;&#1077;&#1077; &#1074;&#1088;&#1077;&#1084;&#1103; &#1101;&#1090;&#1072; &#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1072;&#1085;&#1072; &#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1089;&#1080;&#1083;&#1072; &#1086;&#1075;&#1088;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1095;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;&#1077; &#1082;&#1086;&#1083;&#1080;&#1095;&#1077;&#1089;&#1090;&#1074;&#1086; &#1089;&#1086;&#1074;&#1088;&#1077;&#1084;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1088;&#1086;&#1089;&#1089;&#1080;&#1081;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1093; &#1074;&#1086;&#1086;&#1088;&#1091;&#1078;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1081;, &#1085;&#1086; &#1052;&#1086;&#1089;&#1082;&#1074;&#1072; &#1086;&#1090;&#1082;&#1072;&#1079;&#1099;&#1074;&#1072;&#1083;&#1072;&#1089;&#1100; &#1086;&#1090; &#1090;&#1072;&#1082;&#1080;&#1093; &#1082;&#1086;&#1085;&#1090;&#1088;&#1072;&#1082;&#1090;&#1086;&#1074;, &#1086;&#1087;&#1072;&#1089;&#1072;&#1103;&#1089;&#1100; &#1082;&#1086;&#1087;&#1080;&#1088;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; &#1090;&#1077;&#1093;&#1085;&#1086;&#1083;&#1086;&#1075;&#1080;&#1081;.



___________________________________________________


English version:

_________________________________________________

Russia and China are discussing the shape of the export Su-35
12.29.2010 () Aircraft 12:00 Comments (0) By: Admin
Russia and China are discussing the shape of the export Su-35Vopreki its tradition of keeping China out of the sale of advanced weapons Russia has signaled its intention to deliver the latest model of its Su-35 fighter to the country.

"We are ready to work with Chinese partners in this direction," said the deputy director of RIA Novosti 'Rosoboronexport "Alexander Mikheyev.

Powered by two 117S engines with thrust vector control Su-35 Flanker-E has high maneuverability with the ability to defeat multiple aerial targets simultaneously, it is an arsenal of guided and unguided weapons.

As expected, the first production multi-role fighter will come down the assembly line at the end of this year, the first batch of these aircraft will be released in the period 2010-2015. Local media report () that the order of 48 machines. (48 &#21488; Machine, Su35)

Mikheev, told RIA Novosti that at the present time, Russia and China are the initial stage of the negotiations and will discuss "features an export version of Su-35 and how to integrate it with the previously set by the Su-30 fighters and Su-27 Chinese assembly."

Since 2008, the Su-35 is India, Malaysia, Algeria, Brazil and Venezuela, but no contracts.

Defense News quoted a representative of "Rosoboronexport", that the contract for delivery of Su-35 in China will be the end of the stagnation of Russian arms sales to China. In recent years this country has requested a limited number of advanced Russian weapons, but Moscow refused to such contracts, for fear of copying technology.

__________________________________________

Ðîññèÿ è Êèòàé îáñóæäàþò îáëèê ýêñïîðòíîãî Ñó-35 » Âîåííîå îáîçðåíèå



What are you indian and russian fan boy are gonna say now?


----------



## Nishan_101

I think its a High Tech Aircraft that China wants to have in its airforce! buying 100 of these would make it a potent one!!!!


----------



## DARKY

SinoSoldier said:


> Can you post the link about Antony speaking about the ASE, or is it another one of those vague things?
> 
> The J-11B uses 132 kN engines and an airframe that is 700 kg lighter than the original. None of those are features of the F-16, so its thrust to weight ratio is anything but better.



Give up....
I answered about AESA in last post read again....
As for link google it.

What exactly is T/W ratio of J-11B ?
Korean F-15 has T/W ratio as high as 1.3 still it can't pull maneuvers as Su30MKI/Su35S/F-22A..... Since it lacks additional control surfaces such as TVC nozzels and Canards.


----------



## qwerrty

people should know it's a rubbish when the so called experts syas j-10 is a copy of su-27 and fc-1 is copy of mig-29.


----------



## T90TankGuy

qwerrty said:


> people should know it's a rubbish when the so called experts syas j-10 is a copy of su-27 and fc-1 is copy of mig-29.



you mean it isint? i guess it just happens to look just like it right?


----------



## HavocHeaven

ROFLAMO
kinda a slap in the face, ouch!


----------



## Roybot

Its obvious the 2009 report talks about "discussion", and the current report is talking about close to "finalizing" the deal.

You don't need to be a "rocket scientist"(pun not intended) to figure that one out.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## zhao

i don't believe someone will think it's true.
is there any evidence that the russian themselves buy it for their airforce?


----------



## Black Widow

qwerrty said:


> people should know it's a rubbish when the so called experts syas j-10 is a copy of su-27 and fc-1 is copy of mig-29.



No this is not what ppl say, This is what ppl say (ppl say not me)
1. J10 is lavi
2. J11 is rip off of Su27
3. J15 is rip off of su33
4. FC1 is designed of MiG33.

You say it wrong in ur post...


----------



## HavocHeaven

Roybot said:


> Its obvious the 2009 report talks about "discussion", and the current report is talking about close to "finalizing" the deal.
> 
> You don't need to be a "rocket scientist"(pun not intended) to figure that one out.



lol, at this stage we don't really have the luxury to spend billions of usd on 4.5 gen fighters, like your rafale deal. our defense industrial sectors need r&d funding badly.


----------



## Aramsogo

LOL, Indians want Chinese to buy Su-35 so badly. Please gift US$4.5 Billion to PLAAF on the condition it be spent on Russian made Su-35. Then everybody will be happy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Edevelop

Even if China buy it then i don't understand why Indians are being so childish...

India: Whole fleet is Foreign... including LCA

U.S : Harrier, Mig 29, Su-27 (dont trust me? Have a look a this: List of active United States military aircraft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

England: JAS-39 Gripen (for training) List of active United Kingdom military aircraft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Canada: F-18, F-35

Australia: F-18, F-35

Luftwaffe: F-4

Netherlands: F-16

Turkey : F-16, F-35

Greece : Mirage 200, F-16

Italy: F-16

Switzerland: F-18, F-5, Rafale/Gripen

So what will be so wrong if China purchases at least 1 small squadron of SU-35? It still is better than Su-30MKI and Mig-29K that india possess...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

DARKY said:


> Give up....
> I answered about AESA in last post read again....
> As for link google it.
> 
> What exactly is T/W ratio of J-11B ?
> Korean F-15 has T/W ratio as high as 1.3 still it can't pull maneuvers as Su30MKI/Su35S/F-22A..... Since it lacks additional control surfaces such as TVC nozzels and Canards.



I googled. I found nothing.

J-11B has more powerful engines than the Su-30MKI and a much lighter airframe. Do the math. And what makes you think that the Korean F-15 can't pull those maneuvers besides lacking some features that are not of utmost importance when it comes to agility?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

Relax. The President said the T-50 was better than the F-22. Below is why I don't read Russian news.

- They reported that China was buying the Su-33. Didn't happen.
- They reported that China was buying Tu-22. Didn't happen.
- They reported that China was buying T-50. Didn't happen.
- They reported that China's J-10 is a copy of the Su-27. Laughable.
- They reported that China's J-11B is a copy of the Su-30. Laughable.
- They reported that China's FC-1 is a copy of the MiG-29. Laughable.


----------



## April.lyrics

in fact,china is going to buy LCA.

unfortunately india havent finished it yet....maybe we'll have to wait another decade.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Malik Alashter

I don't think so, otherwise it would a dagger that china deliver to it's loyalty to it's defense industry!!!! they already making some good fighters at least enough to defend the country plus china is much like a leopard that no one would try it!!! another one china spend big money on R&D to get knowledge and technology tomorrow if not they already have it.


----------



## Speeder 2

&#20013;&#26041;&#39539;&#26021;&#21487;&#33021;&#20174;&#20420;&#26041;&#37319;&#36141;48&#26550;&#33487;-35&#25112;&#26426;&#30340;&#25253;&#36947;

18:56 | 2012-03-09 

&#28909;&#28857;&#26032;&#38395;
18:56 &#20013;&#26041;&#39539;&#26021;&#21487;&#33021;&#20174;&#20420;&#26041;&#37319;&#36141;48&#26550;&#33487;-35&#25112;&#26426;&#30340;&#25253;&#36947;
&#21271;&#20140;3&#26376;9&#26085;&#30005; &#35760;&#32773;&#38463;&#21015;&#20811;&#35874;&#21494;&#33778;&#33707;&#22827;&#25253;&#36947;&#65306;&#20013;&#22269;&#22269;&#38450;&#37096;&#26032;&#38395;&#20107;&#21153;&#23616;&#21521;&#20420;&#26032;&#31038;&#36879;&#38706;&#65292;&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#23186;&#20307;&#20851;&#20110;&#20013;&#22269;&#20934;&#22791;&#19982;&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#31614;&#32626;48&#26550;&#33487;-35&#25112;&#26426;&#37319;&#36141;&#21512;&#21516;&#30340;&#25253;&#36947;&#19982;&#20107;&#23454;&#19981;&#31526;&#12290;


¶íÐÂÍø_¶íÖÐ¹ØÏµ_°²È«·ÀÎñ_ÖÐ·½²µ³â¿ÉÄÜ´Ó¶í·½²É¹º48¼ÜËÕ-35Õ½»úµÄ±¨µÀ

Well. use google translator!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Yeti

WAPA) - As expected by our Agency yesterday March 5, 2012, in the following AVIONEWS, China get closer the purchase of Russian technology to improve its aircraft fighter fleet for the Air Force.

Main character of the next negotiation is the super-dogfight Sukhoi Su-35, latest operative version of the multi-role born by the Su-27 family, widely used by China already in official versions and copies built by Chinese.

Russian economic newspapers announced today an agreement for 4 billion dollars which could deliver 48 Sukhoi Su-35 "Flanker-E" to Beijing, specifying the agreement is still static due to the bureaucratic situation about copyright.

In fact, current Chinese air fleet is mainly based on copies of famous international aircraft, purchased and then reproduced by local industries.

A typical example is the Shenyang J-11, a faithful replica of Russian Sukhoi Su-30C. This operation is worrying Moscow, since no laws above copyright exists, to guarantee the respect of foreign illegal production (or rather, production without licenses).

This could bring to an illegal sale, operated by China, of Russian products perfectly copied and offered to the international market with super cheap price, up to prevent purchases from the original production industry, in this case Sukhoi. (Avionews)

---------- Post added at 12:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:45 PM ----------

Avionews - Agenzia stampa del settore aeronautico, elicotteristico, aerospaziale e della difesa


----------



## Aramsogo

Perhaps India can gift China the 48 Su-35's now, since the Chinese having Su-35s makes Indians so happy.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## DARKY

SinoSoldier said:


> I googled. I found nothing.
> 
> J-11B has more powerful engines than the Su-30MKI and a much lighter airframe. Do the math. And what makes you think that the Korean F-15 can't pull those maneuvers besides lacking some features that are not of utmost importance when it comes to agility?


 
India Eyes Su-30 AESA Upgrade | AVIATION WEEK

MAKS 2011: New

Zhuk AESA Radars for Indian Air Force Sukhoi Su-30 MKI Fighters | India Defence

Go and learn something about control surfaces and how does it help in increasing AOA and Turn radius... MKI can turn right on Its axis can J-11B or any plane without TVC do this ?
Maneuvers are not just only T/W ratio of machine... If it were so than the space launchers would be the most maneuverable thing in existence.


----------



## nomi007

i think Chinese just need high performance engines
not whole jets


----------



## skyknight

Aramsogo said:


> Perhaps India can gift China the 48 Su-35's now, since the Chinese having Su-35s makes Indians so happy.


I personally will accept the gift&#65281;


----------



## siegecrossbow

I did a rough translation:



> &#20420;&#26032;&#32593;RUSNEWS.CN&#21271;&#20140;3&#26376;9&#26085;&#30005; &#35760;&#32773;&#38463;&#21015;&#20811;&#35874;&#8226;&#21494;&#33778;&#33707;&#22827;&#25253;&#36947;&#65306;&#20013;&#22269;&#22269;&#38450;&#37096;&#26032;&#38395;&#20107;&#21153;&#23616;&#21521;&#20420;&#26032;&#31038;&#36879;&#38706;&#65292;&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#23186;&#20307;&#20851;&#20110;&#20013;&#22269;&#20934;&#22791;&#19982;&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#31614;&#32626;48&#26550;&#33487;-35&#25112;&#26426;&#37319;&#36141;&#21512;&#21516;&#30340;&#25253;&#36947;&#19982;&#20107;&#23454;&#19981;&#31526;&#12290;
> 
> &#20013;&#22269;&#22269;&#38450;&#37096;&#22312;&#20070;&#38754;&#31572;&#22797;&#20013;&#35828;&#26126;&#65306;&#8220;&#36817;&#24180;&#26469;&#65292;&#20013;&#20420;&#20840;&#38754;&#25112;&#30053;&#21327;&#20316;&#20249;&#20276;&#20851;&#31995;&#20445;&#25345;&#20581;&#24247;&#31283;&#23450;&#21457;&#23637;&#30340;&#21183;&#22836;&#65292;&#21452;&#26041;&#21508;&#39046;&#22495;&#21512;&#20316;&#36827;&#23637;&#39034;&#21033;&#65292;&#25104;&#26524;&#20016;&#30805;&#12290;&#20420;&#20013;&#20891;&#20107;&#21512;&#20316;&#20316;&#20026;&#20420;&#20013;&#25112;&#30053;&#21327;&#20316;&#20249;&#20276;&#20851;&#31995;&#30340;&#37325;&#35201;&#32452;&#25104;&#37096;&#20998;&#65292;&#19968;&#30452;&#22312;&#27491;&#24120;&#24320;&#23637;&#24182;&#19981;&#26029;&#21462;&#24471;&#25104;&#26524;&#65292;&#20294;&#26377;&#20851;&#23186;&#20307;&#25152;&#31216;&#8216;&#20013;&#20420;&#21452;&#26041;&#24050;&#23601;&#36141;&#20080;48&#26550;&#33487;-35&#25112;&#26426;&#36798;&#25104;&#19968;&#33268;'&#19968;&#20107;&#26159;&#27809;&#26377;&#20107;&#23454;&#20381;&#25454;&#30340;&#12290;&#8221;
> 
> 3&#26376;6&#26085;&#65292;&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#12298;&#29983;&#24847;&#20154;&#25253;&#12299;&#25588;&#24341;&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#20891;&#20107;&#24037;&#19994;&#32508;&#21512;&#20307;&#19968;&#21517;&#28040;&#24687;&#20154;&#22763;&#30340;&#35805;&#31216;&#65292;&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#21644;&#20013;&#22269;&#24050;&#23601;48&#26550;&#33487;-35&#25112;&#26426;&#30340;&#20379;&#24212;&#21512;&#21516;&#22522;&#26412;&#36798;&#25104;&#19968;&#33268;&#65292;&#21512;&#21516;&#24635;&#39069;&#32422;&#36798;40&#20159;&#32654;&#20803;&#12290;



RusNEWS.CN reports (3-09-12 Beijing time): Reporter Alexi Yafmov reports: The Chinese Department of defence revealed to RusNews that reports by the Russian media regarding the signing of a 48 Su-35 fighter contract between China and Russia are inaccurate.

The Chinese Department of Defense clarified that : "In recent years, China maintained close strategic partnership with Russia and successfully cooperated in numerous domains. Sino-Russian military cooperation is an important part of Sino-Russian strategic partnership that is being carried out smoothly and has continuously yielded results. Reports that "China and Russia agreed on the purchase on 48 Su-35 fighters, however, have no factual basis.

On March 6th, Russian newspaper Kommersant quoted a Russian military insider when supposedly said that China and Russia agreed to sign a contract which will supply the Chinese military with 48 Su-35 fighters. The contract would have a net worth of 4.0 billion dollars.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## graphican

siegecrossbow said:


> I did a rough translation:
> 
> 
> 
> RusNEWS.CN reports (3-09-12 Beijing time): Reporter Alexi Yafmov reports: The Chinese Department of defence revealed to RusNews that reports by the Russian media regarding the signing of a 48 Su-35 fighter contract between China and Russia are inaccurate.
> 
> The Chinese Department of Defense clarified that : "In recent years, China maintained close strategic partnership with Russia and successfully cooperated in numerous domains. Sino-Russian military cooperation is an important part of Sino-Russian strategic partnership that is being carried out smoothly and has continuously yielded results. Reports that "China and Russia agreed on the purchase on 48 Su-35 fighters, however, have no factual basis.
> 
> On March 6th, Russian newspaper Kommersant quoted a Russian military insider when supposedly said that China and Russia agreed to sign a contract which will supply the Chinese military with 48 Su-35 fighters. *The contract would have a net worth of 40 billion dollars.*




4.0 probably.. not 40 Billion dollars!


----------



## siegecrossbow

graphican said:


> [/B][/COLOR]
> 
> 4.0 probably.. not 40 Billion dollars!



Thnx. Just corrected it in the translation.


----------



## T90TankGuy

i remember someone who was willing to donate 100$ in case the news was false . 

can i PM him my favorite charity

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## godson

the indian are clever people, they "belive" the china-buy-su35 news, but do not dare to bet $100 for the reality of this news

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

nomi007 said:


> i think Chinese just need high performance engines
> not whole jets



No, we don't need their so-called "high performance engines", there isn't anything in Su-35 that is interested to us so far.


----------



## itaskol

thanks to god that we dont buy su35. huge waste of money.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## amalakas

SinoSoldier said:


> I googled. I found nothing.
> 
> *J-11B has more powerful engines than the Su-30MKI and a much lighter airframe.* Do the math. And what makes you think that the Korean F-15 can't pull those maneuvers besides lacking some features that are not of utmost importance when it comes to agility?


 

OK, says who, where, in what context, and has anyone managed to verify it?


----------



## pzkilo

HavocHeaven said:


> I am fed up with all these Indian craps.
> 
> If China inks any SU-35 deals in six months ("near future"), I will donate $100 to an Indian charity organization and post scanned receipt; Otherwise, you guys donate $100 to a Chinese charity account.
> 
> I challenge all you Indians in this thread, officially.


 
Man, u just won ur bet!!!! grats!!!


----------



## AerospaceEngineer

China has officially DENY the purchase of SU-35 !!!!


__________________________________

&#20420;&#26032;&#32593;RUSNEWS.CN&#21271;&#20140;3&#26376;9&#26085;&#30005; &#35760;&#32773;&#38463;&#21015;&#20811;&#35874;&#21494;&#33778;&#33707;&#22827;&#25253;&#36947;&#65306;&#20013;&#22269;&#22269;&#38450;&#37096;&#26032;&#38395;&#20107;&#21153;&#23616;&#21521;&#20420;&#26032;&#31038;&#36879;&#38706;&#65292;&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#23186;&#20307;&#20851;&#20110;&#20013;&#22269;&#20934;&#22791;&#19982;&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#31614;&#32626;48&#26550;&#33487;-35&#25112;&#26426;&#37319;&#36141;&#21512;&#21516;&#30340;&#25253;&#36947;&#19982;&#20107;&#23454;&#19981;&#31526;&#12290; 

&#20013;&#22269;&#22269;&#38450;&#37096;&#22312;&#20070;&#38754;&#31572;&#22797;&#20013;&#35828;&#26126;&#65306;&#36817;&#24180;&#26469;&#65292;&#20013;&#20420;&#20840;&#38754;&#25112;&#30053;&#21327;&#20316;&#20249;&#20276;&#20851;&#31995;&#20445;&#25345;&#20581;&#24247;&#31283;&#23450;&#21457;&#23637;&#30340;&#21183;&#22836;&#65292;&#21452;&#26041;&#21508;&#39046;&#22495;&#21512;&#20316;&#36827;&#23637;&#39034;&#21033;&#65292;&#25104;&#26524;&#20016;&#30805;&#12290;&#20420;&#20013;&#20891;&#20107;&#21512;&#20316;&#20316;&#20026;&#20420;&#20013;&#25112;&#30053;&#21327;&#20316;&#20249;&#20276;&#20851;&#31995;&#30340;&#37325;&#35201;&#32452;&#25104;&#37096;&#20998;&#65292;&#19968;&#30452;&#22312;&#27491;&#24120;&#24320;&#23637;&#24182;&#19981;&#26029;&#21462;&#24471;&#25104;&#26524;&#65292;&#20294;&#26377;&#20851;&#23186;&#20307;&#25152;&#31216;&#20013;&#20420;&#21452;&#26041;&#24050;&#23601;&#36141;&#20080;48&#26550;&#33487;-35&#25112;&#26426;&#36798;&#25104;&#19968;&#33268;'&#19968;&#20107;&#26159;&#27809;&#26377;&#20107;&#23454;&#20381;&#25454;&#30340;&#12290;

3&#26376;6&#26085;&#65292;&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#12298;&#29983;&#24847;&#20154;&#25253;&#12299;&#25588;&#24341;&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#20891;&#20107;&#24037;&#19994;&#32508;&#21512;&#20307;&#19968;&#21517;&#28040;&#24687;&#20154;&#22763;&#30340;&#35805;&#31216;&#65292;&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#21644;&#20013;&#22269;&#24050;&#23601;48&#26550;&#33487;-35&#25112;&#26426;&#30340;&#20379;&#24212;&#21512;&#21516;&#22522;&#26412;&#36798;&#25104;&#19968;&#33268;&#65292;&#21512;&#21516;&#24635;&#39069;&#32422;&#36798;40&#20159;&#32654;&#20803;&#12290;

¶íÐÂÍø_¶íÖÐ¹ØÏµ_°²È«·ÀÎñ_ÖÐ·½²µ³â¿ÉÄÜ´Ó¶í·½²É¹º48¼ÜËÕ-35Õ½»úµÄ±¨µÀ

____________________________________________


What you indians gonna say now ?????

Now the russians will just say that "due to IP issue, we ONCE again REFUSE To sell the SU-35 to CHINA !!!

SU-35 is the GOD fighter of Russian air force, and it shall remain the GOD fighter of russian air force.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## j20blackdragon

http://www.ria.ru/defense_safety/20120309/590972243.html


----------



## AerospaceEngineer

Such a relief.


Now the russians will say that: " Due to IP issure, the deal fell through again.'"

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## DrSomnath999

i cant understand one thing why the same news is highlighted so much , that many thread on this same topic is posted in this section .


----------



## Secur

Where are the jumping Indians at the moment ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## HavocHeaven

pzkilo said:


> Man, u just won ur bet!!!! grats!!!



keke, lets see their response


----------



## HavocHeaven

itaskol said:


> thanks to god that we dont buy su35. huge waste of money.



i never believed it. 
you know what, indians didn't believe it either
that's why they were reluctant to place a bet

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## siegecrossbow

DrSomnath999 said:


> i cant understand one thing why the same news is highlighted so much , that many thread on this same topic is posted in this section .



Most Chinese members are understandably upset since such b.s. news are almost always treated as factual before they are debunked. Many people got carried away, from both sides.


----------



## shree835

nomi007 said:


> i think Chinese just need high performance engines
> not whole jets



high performance engines...Don say that...Otherwise Chini will come up with lot of argument.


----------



## T90TankGuy

this had already been posted mate , do visit the thread


----------



## Aramsogo

jbgt90 said:


> i remember someone who was willing to donate 100$ in case the news was false .
> 
> can i PM him my favorite charity



Yes, please do PM him. There is a pledge page on this topic under Su-35 Charity Challenge.


----------



## scherz

What u r talking about slamdog friend?


----------



## Speeder 2

As i said previously in another forum, the only thing in Su-35 that is clearly superior to J-11B is its 3D vector engine. Yet there is no need for China to waste $ 4B for that, since it's not ideal either for J-20 or as a WS-15 backup. With all that money, brains and time imput, WS-15 must succeed without any backup, and so far all the news/rumors on it are positive. 

Futhermore, PLAAF is simplifying its logistics with datalinks among all major jet breeds. Su-35 would be a very expensive sore thumb that is both deaf and blind in this regard should the purchase were made, since Russia would be unlikley to give China access to its sourcecodes or even permission to facilitate datalink and other advanced communications.

I don't see Su-35 is clearly ahead of J-11B in electronics or radar either (China has already surpassed Rusia in electronics industry by and large, while some of Su-35 electronics are outsoucred to Samsung...). In contrast to Su-35's PESA, all front line PLAAF war birds, being J-11B, J-10B, J-15 (even JF-17 II or III?), are/will be mass-eqipped with more advanced indigenous AESA.

I recall that Putin was cheerleading the sale of Su-35 to China 1 year or 2 ago. China would have bought it if it were early 2000s when J-10 was just online. Now Su-35's utility value for China has drop significantly especialy in light of China's goal of fully indigenous and independent national defence industry, and it would be foolish for PLAAF to even consider it.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## ptldM3

Speeder 2 said:


> As i said previously in another forum, *the only thing in Su-35 that is clearly superior to J-11B is its 3D vector engine. * Yet there is no need for China to waste $ 4B for that, since it's not ideal either for J-20 or as a WS-15 backup. With all that money, brains and time imput, WS-15 must succeed without any backup, and so far all the news/rumors on it are positive.




Right and i'm sure you got some classified information from both the J-11B and SU-35 to come to that conclusion.





Speeder 2 said:


> I don't see Su-35 is clearly ahead of J-11B in electronics or radar either (China has already surpassed Rusia in electronics industry by and large, while some of Su-35 electronics are outsoucred to Samsung...). In contrast to Su-35's PESA, all front line PLAAF war birds, being J-11B, J-10B, J-15 (even JF-17 II or III?), are/will be mass-eqipped with more advanced indigenous AESA.




China hired a Russian company to help develop to electronics for the PL-12.


----------



## sexy gun

ptldM3 said:


> Right and i'm sure you got some classified information from both the J-11B and SU-35 to come to that conclusion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China hired a Russian company to help develop to electronics for the PL-12.



Ingrates


----------



## artaxerces

"China hired a Russian company to help develop to electronics for the PL-12."

Of course, however that does not negate Speeder2's point. Technical Cooperation with AGAT in the mid 90s was useful when the Russian electronics industry had a significant technological lead. But 15 years down the line, the scale and scope of the Chinese domestic electronics industry is about an order of magnitude larger than Russia. 

Moreover, would you not agree that the relative capabilities of the Russian Electronics Industry has actually atrophied over the last 15 years due to the destruction of it's supply chain ecosystem? In this respect, Chinese's aircraft companies would have access to substantially more(and better) dual-use commercial technologies than Russia would.

So overall, I don't see Russia has having a measurable lead over China in terms of Electronics/Avionics technology.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## AerospaceEngineer

Here is the official website of Sukhoi:

ÎÀÎ "Êîìïàíèÿ "Ñóõîé" - Íîâîñòè - Íîâîñòè êîìïàíèè


_________________________________

There is no news regarding the sales of 48 SU-35 to China what so ever.

The only recent news about the SU-35 is an air show in Singapore:

&#1050;&#1086;&#1084;&#1087;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; «&#1057;&#1091;&#1093;&#1086;&#1081;» &#1074;&#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1074;&#1099;&#1077; &#1087;&#1088;&#1077;&#1076;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074;&#1080;&#1090; &#1085;&#1072; &#1072;&#1074;&#1090;&#1086;&#1089;&#1072;&#1083;&#1086;&#1085;&#1077; &#1074; &#1057;&#1080;&#1085;&#1075;&#1072;&#1087;&#1091;&#1088;&#1077; &#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1077;&#1073;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1100; &#1057;&#1091;-35

The company "Sukhoi" the first time present at the motor show in Singapore, Su-35


__________________________________________________

&#1052;&#1086;&#1089;&#1082;&#1074;&#1072;, 13 &#1092;&#1077;&#1074;&#1088;&#1072;&#1083;&#1103;. &#1050;&#1086;&#1084;&#1087;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; «&#1057;&#1091;&#1093;&#1086;&#1081;» &#1074;&#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1074;&#1099;&#1077; &#1087;&#1088;&#1077;&#1076;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074;&#1083;&#1103;&#1077;&#1090; &#1085;&#1072; &#1086;&#1090;&#1082;&#1088;&#1099;&#1074;&#1072;&#1102;&#1097;&#1077;&#1084;&#1089;&#1103; &#1079;&#1072;&#1074;&#1090;&#1088;&#1072;, 14 &#1092;&#1077;&#1074;&#1088;&#1072;&#1083;&#1103;, &#1084;&#1077;&#1078;&#1076;&#1091;&#1085;&#1072;&#1088;&#1086;&#1076;&#1085;&#1086;&#1084; &#1072;&#1074;&#1080;&#1072;&#1089;&#1072;&#1083;&#1086;&#1085;&#1077; Singapore Air Show 2012 &#1084;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086;&#1092;&#1091;&#1085;&#1082;&#1094;&#1080;&#1086;&#1085;&#1072;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1099;&#1081; &#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1077;&#1073;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1100; &#1087;&#1086;&#1082;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; «4++» &#1057;&#1091;-35. &#1053;&#1072; &#1089;&#1090;&#1077;&#1085;&#1076;&#1077; &#1054;&#1073;&#1098;&#1077;&#1076;&#1080;&#1085;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;&#1081; &#1072;&#1074;&#1080;&#1072;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1086;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1086;&#1081; &#1082;&#1086;&#1088;&#1087;&#1086;&#1088;&#1072;&#1094;&#1080;&#1080; (&#1054;&#1040;&#1050, &#1074; &#1089;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074; &#1082;&#1086;&#1090;&#1086;&#1088;&#1086;&#1081; &#1074;&#1093;&#1086;&#1076;&#1080;&#1090; &#1093;&#1086;&#1083;&#1076;&#1080;&#1085;&#1075;, &#1073;&#1091;&#1076;&#1077;&#1090; &#1074;&#1099;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074;&#1083;&#1077;&#1085;&#1072; &#1084;&#1086;&#1076;&#1077;&#1083;&#1100; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1072;. &#1055;&#1086;&#1089;&#1077;&#1090;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1080; &#1074;&#1099;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074;&#1082;&#1080; &#1080; &#1089;&#1087;&#1077;&#1094;&#1080;&#1072;&#1083;&#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1099; &#1089;&#1084;&#1086;&#1075;&#1091;&#1090; &#1086;&#1079;&#1085;&#1072;&#1082;&#1086;&#1084;&#1080;&#1090;&#1100;&#1089;&#1103; &#1089; &#1077;&#1075;&#1086; &#1090;&#1072;&#1082;&#1090;&#1080;&#1082;&#1086;-&#1090;&#1077;&#1093;&#1085;&#1080;&#1095;&#1077;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1084;&#1080; &#1093;&#1072;&#1088;&#1072;&#1082;&#1090;&#1077;&#1088;&#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080;&#1082;&#1072;&#1084;&#1080; &#1080; &#1086;&#1073;&#1089;&#1091;&#1076;&#1080;&#1090;&#1100; &#1089; &#1087;&#1088;&#1077;&#1076;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1103;&#1084;&#1080; «&#1057;&#1091;&#1093;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086;» &#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1089;&#1087;&#1077;&#1082;&#1090;&#1080;&#1074;&#1099; &#1077;&#1075;&#1086; &#1087;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074;&#1082;&#1080; &#1074;&#1086;&#1086;&#1088;&#1091;&#1078;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1084; &#1089;&#1080;&#1083;&#1072;&#1084; &#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1072;&#1085; &#1088;&#1077;&#1075;&#1080;&#1086;&#1085;&#1072;. &#1042; &#1085;&#1072;&#1089;&#1090;&#1086;&#1103;&#1097;&#1077;&#1077; &#1074;&#1088;&#1077;&#1084;&#1103; &#1082;&#1086;&#1084;&#1087;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; &#1074;&#1077;&#1076;&#1077;&#1090; &#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1077;&#1075;&#1086;&#1074;&#1086;&#1088;&#1099; &#1089; &#1080;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1072;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1084;&#1080; &#1079;&#1072;&#1082;&#1072;&#1079;&#1095;&#1080;&#1082;&#1072;&#1084;&#1080;, &#1079;&#1072;&#1080;&#1085;&#1090;&#1077;&#1088;&#1077;&#1089;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1084;&#1080; &#1074; &#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1077;&#1074;&#1086;&#1086;&#1088;&#1091;&#1078;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1080; &#1089;&#1074;&#1086;&#1080;&#1093; &#1042;&#1042;&#1057;. &#1057;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1099; &#1057;&#1091;-35 &#1087;&#1083;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1088;&#1091;&#1102;&#1090;&#1089;&#1103; &#1082; &#1087;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074;&#1082;&#1077; &#1074; &#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1072;&#1085;&#1099; &#1070;&#1075;&#1086;-&#1042;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1086;&#1095;&#1085;&#1086;&#1081; &#1040;&#1079;&#1080;&#1080;, &#1041;&#1083;&#1080;&#1078;&#1085;&#1077;&#1075;&#1086; &#1042;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1086;&#1082;&#1072; &#1080; &#1070;&#1078;&#1085;&#1086;&#1081; &#1040;&#1084;&#1077;&#1088;&#1080;&#1082;&#1080;. &#1047;&#1072;&#1082;&#1083;&#1102;&#1095;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1077; &#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1099;&#1093; &#1082;&#1086;&#1085;&#1090;&#1088;&#1072;&#1082;&#1090;&#1086;&#1074; &#1087;&#1086;&#1079;&#1074;&#1086;&#1083;&#1080;&#1090; &#1087;&#1086;&#1076;&#1076;&#1077;&#1088;&#1078;&#1072;&#1090;&#1100; &#1074;&#1099;&#1089;&#1086;&#1082;&#1091;&#1102; &#1082;&#1086;&#1085;&#1082;&#1091;&#1088;&#1077;&#1085;&#1090;&#1086;&#1089;&#1087;&#1086;&#1089;&#1086;&#1073;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1100; &#1056;&#1086;&#1089;&#1089;&#1080;&#1080; &#1085;&#1072; &#1084;&#1080;&#1088;&#1086;&#1074;&#1086;&#1084; &#1088;&#1099;&#1085;&#1082;&#1077; &#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1077;&#1073;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1077;&#1081; &#1076;&#1086; &#1074;&#1099;&#1093;&#1086;&#1076;&#1072; &#1074; 2016-2025 &#1075;. &#1075;. &#1085;&#1072; &#1088;&#1099;&#1085;&#1086;&#1082; &#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1077;&#1073;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1103; &#1087;&#1103;&#1090;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1087;&#1086;&#1082;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103;.

&#1056;&#1072;&#1079;&#1088;&#1072;&#1073;&#1086;&#1090;&#1082;&#1072; &#1080; &#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1080;&#1079;&#1074;&#1086;&#1076;&#1089;&#1090;&#1074;&#1086; &#1089;&#1074;&#1077;&#1088;&#1093;&#1084;&#1072;&#1085;&#1077;&#1074;&#1088;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1084;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086;&#1092;&#1091;&#1085;&#1082;&#1094;&#1080;&#1086;&#1085;&#1072;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1077;&#1073;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1103; &#1087;&#1086;&#1082;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; «4++» &#1057;&#1091;-35 (&#1057;&#1091;-35&#1057; &#1074; &#1088;&#1086;&#1089;&#1089;&#1080;&#1081;&#1089;&#1082;&#1086;&#1081; &#1084;&#1086;&#1076;&#1080;&#1092;&#1080;&#1082;&#1072;&#1094;&#1080;&#1080 &#1074;&#1093;&#1086;&#1076;&#1080;&#1090; &#1074; &#1095;&#1080;&#1089;&#1083;&#1086; &#1087;&#1088;&#1080;&#1086;&#1088;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1090;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1075;&#1088;&#1072;&#1084;&#1084; &#1082;&#1086;&#1084;&#1087;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1080; «&#1057;&#1091;&#1093;&#1086;&#1081;». &#1042; &#1085;&#1072;&#1089;&#1090;&#1086;&#1103;&#1097;&#1077;&#1077; &#1074;&#1088;&#1077;&#1084;&#1103; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1099; &#1057;&#1091;-35-1,2 &#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1093;&#1086;&#1076;&#1103;&#1090; &#1075;&#1086;&#1089;&#1091;&#1076;&#1072;&#1088;&#1089;&#1090;&#1074;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1077; &#1089;&#1086;&#1074;&#1084;&#1077;&#1089;&#1090;&#1085;&#1099;&#1077; &#1080;&#1089;&#1087;&#1099;&#1090;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; (&#1043;&#1057;&#1048. &#1054;&#1076;&#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1088;&#1077;&#1084;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086; &#1082; &#1085;&#1080;&#1084; &#1073;&#1099;&#1083; &#1087;&#1086;&#1076;&#1082;&#1083;&#1102;&#1095;&#1077;&#1085; &#1080; &#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1074;&#1099;&#1081; &#1089;&#1077;&#1088;&#1080;&#1081;&#1085;&#1099;&#1081; &#1057;&#1091;-35&#1057;-1, &#1072; &#1074; &#1085;&#1072;&#1095;&#1072;&#1083;&#1077; &#1101;&#1090;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1075;&#1086;&#1076;&#1072; &#1057;&#1091;-35&#1057;-2. &#1058;&#1088;&#1077;&#1090;&#1080;&#1081; &#1080; &#1095;&#1077;&#1090;&#1074;&#1077;&#1088;&#1090;&#1099;&#1081; &#1089;&#1077;&#1088;&#1080;&#1081;&#1085;&#1099;&#1077; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1099; &#1073;&#1091;&#1076;&#1091;&#1090; &#1087;&#1086;&#1076;&#1082;&#1083;&#1102;&#1095;&#1077;&#1085;&#1099; &#1082; &#1043;&#1057;&#1048; &#1074; &#1073;&#1083;&#1080;&#1078;&#1072;&#1081;&#1096;&#1077;&#1077; &#1074;&#1088;&#1077;&#1084;&#1103;. &#1053;&#1072; &#1057;&#1091;-35-1,2 &#1074;&#1099;&#1087;&#1086;&#1083;&#1085;&#1077;&#1085;&#1099; &#1087;&#1088;&#1077;&#1076;&#1074;&#1072;&#1088;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1099;&#1077; &#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1085;&#1099;&#1077; &#1080;&#1089;&#1087;&#1099;&#1090;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103;, &#1074; &#1093;&#1086;&#1076;&#1077; &#1082;&#1086;&#1090;&#1086;&#1088;&#1099;&#1093; &#1073;&#1099;&#1083;&#1080; &#1087;&#1086;&#1083;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1100;&#1102; &#1087;&#1086;&#1076;&#1090;&#1074;&#1077;&#1088;&#1078;&#1076;&#1077;&#1085;&#1099; &#1086;&#1089;&#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1085;&#1099;&#1077; &#1091;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1083;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1077; &#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1085;&#1086;-&#1090;&#1077;&#1093;&#1085;&#1080;&#1095;&#1077;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1077; &#1093;&#1072;&#1088;&#1072;&#1082;&#1090;&#1077;&#1088;&#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080;&#1082;&#1080; &#1082;&#1086;&#1084;&#1087;&#1083;&#1077;&#1082;&#1089;&#1072; &#1073;&#1086;&#1088;&#1090;&#1086;&#1074;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1086;&#1073;&#1086;&#1088;&#1091;&#1076;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; &#1080; &#1093;&#1072;&#1088;&#1072;&#1082;&#1090;&#1077;&#1088;&#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080;&#1082;&#1080; &#1089;&#1074;&#1077;&#1088;&#1093;&#1084;&#1072;&#1085;&#1077;&#1074;&#1088;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080;, &#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1074;&#1077;&#1088;&#1077;&#1085;&#1099; &#1093;&#1072;&#1088;&#1072;&#1082;&#1090;&#1077;&#1088;&#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080;&#1082;&#1080; &#1091;&#1089;&#1090;&#1086;&#1081;&#1095;&#1080;&#1074;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080; &#1080; &#1091;&#1087;&#1088;&#1072;&#1074;&#1083;&#1103;&#1077;&#1084;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080;, &#1093;&#1072;&#1088;&#1072;&#1082;&#1090;&#1077;&#1088;&#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080;&#1082;&#1080; &#1089;&#1080;&#1083;&#1086;&#1074;&#1086;&#1081; &#1091;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1082;&#1080;, &#1088;&#1072;&#1073;&#1086;&#1090;&#1072; &#1085;&#1072;&#1074;&#1080;&#1075;&#1072;&#1094;&#1080;&#1086;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;&#1081; &#1089;&#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1077;&#1084;&#1099;. &#1044;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080;&#1075;&#1085;&#1091;&#1090;&#1072;&#1103; &#1084;&#1072;&#1082;&#1089;&#1080;&#1084;&#1072;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1072;&#1103; &#1089;&#1082;&#1086;&#1088;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1100; &#1091; &#1079;&#1077;&#1084;&#1083;&#1080; &#1089;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074;&#1083;&#1103;&#1077;&#1090; 1400 &#1082;&#1084;., &#1085;&#1072; &#1074;&#1099;&#1089;&#1086;&#1090;&#1077; &#8212; 2400 &#1082;&#1084;\&#1095;., &#1087;&#1086;&#1090;&#1086;&#1083;&#1086;&#1082; &#8212; 18 &#1090;&#1099;&#1089;. &#1084;. &#1044;&#1072;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1100; &#1086;&#1073;&#1085;&#1072;&#1088;&#1091;&#1078;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; &#1094;&#1077;&#1083;&#1077;&#1081; &#1074; &#1088;&#1077;&#1078;&#1080;&#1084;&#1077; «&#1074;&#1086;&#1079;&#1076;&#1091;&#1093;»-«&#1074;&#1086;&#1079;&#1076;&#1091;&#1093;» &#8212; &#1089;&#1074;&#1099;&#1096;&#1077; 400 &#1082;&#1084;. &#1069;&#1090;&#1086; &#1089;&#1091;&#1097;&#1077;&#1089;&#1090;&#1074;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086; &#1087;&#1088;&#1077;&#1074;&#1099;&#1096;&#1072;&#1077;&#1090; &#1072;&#1085;&#1072;&#1083;&#1086;&#1075;&#1080;&#1095;&#1085;&#1099;&#1081; &#1087;&#1086;&#1082;&#1072;&#1079;&#1072;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1100; &#1089;&#1090;&#1086;&#1103;&#1097;&#1080;&#1093; &#1085;&#1072; &#1074;&#1086;&#1086;&#1088;&#1091;&#1078;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1080; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1086;&#1074;. &#1041;&#1086;&#1088;&#1090;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1103; &#1056;&#1051;&#1057; &#1087;&#1086;&#1079;&#1074;&#1086;&#1083;&#1103;&#1077;&#1090; &#1086;&#1073;&#1085;&#1072;&#1088;&#1091;&#1078;&#1080;&#1074;&#1072;&#1090;&#1100; &#1080; &#1089;&#1086;&#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1074;&#1086;&#1078;&#1076;&#1072;&#1090;&#1100; &#1085;&#1077;&#1089;&#1082;&#1086;&#1083;&#1100;&#1082;&#1086; &#1094;&#1077;&#1083;&#1077;&#1081; &#1085;&#1072; &#1076;&#1072;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080; &#1089;&#1074;&#1099;&#1096;&#1077; 80 &#1082;&#1084;. &#1042; &#1088;&#1072;&#1084;&#1082;&#1072;&#1093; &#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1080;&#1089;&#1087;&#1099;&#1090;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1081; &#1085;&#1072; &#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1077;&#1073;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1103;&#1093; &#1089;&#1086;&#1074;&#1077;&#1088;&#1096;&#1077;&#1085;&#1086; &#1073;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1077; 400 &#1087;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1086;&#1074;. &#1050;&#1086;&#1084;&#1087;&#1083;&#1077;&#1082;&#1089; &#1075;&#1086;&#1090;&#1086;&#1074; &#1082; &#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1093;&#1086;&#1078;&#1076;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1102; &#1080;&#1089;&#1087;&#1099;&#1090;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1081; &#1085;&#1072; &#1073;&#1086;&#1077;&#1074;&#1086;&#1077; &#1087;&#1088;&#1080;&#1084;&#1077;&#1085;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1077;. 

&#1040;&#1085;&#1072;&#1083;&#1080;&#1079; &#1074;&#1099;&#1087;&#1086;&#1083;&#1085;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1086;&#1073;&#1098;&#1077;&#1084;&#1072; &#1088;&#1072;&#1073;&#1086;&#1090; &#1087;&#1086;&#1079;&#1074;&#1086;&#1083;&#1103;&#1077;&#1090; &#1091;&#1078;&#1077; &#1089;&#1077;&#1075;&#1086;&#1076;&#1085;&#1103; &#1089;&#1076;&#1077;&#1083;&#1072;&#1090;&#1100; &#1074;&#1099;&#1074;&#1086;&#1076; &#1086; &#1090;&#1086;&#1084;, &#1095;&#1090;&#1086; &#1057;&#1091;-35/&#1057;&#1091;-35&#1057; &#1086;&#1073;&#1083;&#1072;&#1076;&#1072;&#1077;&#1090; &#1079;&#1085;&#1072;&#1095;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1086; &#1083;&#1091;&#1095;&#1096;&#1080;&#1084;&#1080; &#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1085;&#1086;-&#1090;&#1077;&#1093;&#1085;&#1080;&#1095;&#1077;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1084;&#1080; &#1093;&#1072;&#1088;&#1072;&#1082;&#1090;&#1077;&#1088;&#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080;&#1082;&#1072;&#1084;&#1080; &#1087;&#1086; &#1089;&#1088;&#1072;&#1074;&#1085;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1102; &#1089;&#1086; &#1089;&#1090;&#1086;&#1103;&#1097;&#1080;&#1084;&#1080; &#1085;&#1072; &#1074;&#1086;&#1086;&#1088;&#1091;&#1078;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1080; &#1084;&#1072;&#1096;&#1080;&#1085;&#1072;&#1084;&#1080;-&#1072;&#1085;&#1072;&#1083;&#1086;&#1075;&#1072;&#1084;&#1080;, &#1072; &#1091;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1083;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1081; &#1082;&#1086;&#1084;&#1087;&#1083;&#1077;&#1082;&#1089; &#1073;&#1086;&#1088;&#1090;&#1086;&#1074;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1086;&#1073;&#1086;&#1088;&#1091;&#1076;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; &#1087;&#1086;&#1079;&#1074;&#1086;&#1083;&#1103;&#1077;&#1090; &#1088;&#1077;&#1096;&#1072;&#1090;&#1100; &#1073;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1077; &#1096;&#1080;&#1088;&#1086;&#1082;&#1080;&#1081; &#1082;&#1088;&#1091;&#1075; &#1079;&#1072;&#1076;&#1072;&#1095;, &#1086;&#1087;&#1088;&#1077;&#1076;&#1077;&#1083;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1090;&#1072;&#1082;&#1090;&#1080;&#1082;&#1086;-&#1090;&#1077;&#1093;&#1085;&#1080;&#1095;&#1077;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1084; &#1079;&#1072;&#1076;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1077;&#1084;. &#1047;&#1072;&#1083;&#1086;&#1078;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1077; &#1074; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1077; &#1087;&#1086;&#1090;&#1077;&#1085;&#1094;&#1080;&#1072;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1099;&#1077; &#1093;&#1072;&#1088;&#1072;&#1082;&#1090;&#1077;&#1088;&#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080;&#1082;&#1080; &#1087;&#1086;&#1079;&#1074;&#1086;&#1083;&#1103;&#1090; &#1087;&#1088;&#1077;&#1074;&#1086;&#1089;&#1093;&#1086;&#1076;&#1080;&#1090;&#1100; &#1074;&#1089;&#1077; &#1090;&#1072;&#1082;&#1090;&#1080;&#1095;&#1077;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1077; &#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1077;&#1073;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1080; &#1087;&#1086;&#1082;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; 4 &#1080; 4 + &#1090;&#1080;&#1087;&#1072; «Rafale» &#1080; EF 2000, &#1084;&#1086;&#1076;&#1077;&#1088;&#1085;&#1080;&#1079;&#1080;&#1088;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1077; &#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1077;&#1073;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1080; &#1090;&#1080;&#1087;&#1072; F-15, F-16, F-18, F-35 &#1080; &#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1090;&#1080;&#1074;&#1086;&#1076;&#1077;&#1081;&#1089;&#1090;&#1074;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1090;&#1100; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1091; F-22A. 

&#1057;&#1091;-35&#1057; &#1080; &#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1089;&#1087;&#1077;&#1082;&#1090;&#1080;&#1074;&#1085;&#1099;&#1081; &#1072;&#1074;&#1080;&#1072;&#1094;&#1080;&#1086;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1081; &#1082;&#1086;&#1084;&#1087;&#1083;&#1077;&#1082;&#1089; &#1087;&#1103;&#1090;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1087;&#1086;&#1082;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; (&#1055;&#1040;&#1050; &#1060;&#1040 &#1073;&#1091;&#1076;&#1091;&#1090; &#1086;&#1087;&#1088;&#1077;&#1076;&#1077;&#1083;&#1103;&#1090;&#1100; &#1091;&#1088;&#1086;&#1074;&#1077;&#1085;&#1100; &#1086;&#1073;&#1086;&#1088;&#1086;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1087;&#1086;&#1089;&#1086;&#1073;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080; &#1056;&#1086;&#1089;&#1089;&#1080;&#1080;. &#1042; &#1089;&#1086;&#1086;&#1090;&#1074;&#1077;&#1090;&#1089;&#1090;&#1074;&#1080;&#1080; &#1089; &#1079;&#1072;&#1082;&#1083;&#1102;&#1095;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1084; &#1074; 2009 &#1075;. &#1075;&#1086;&#1089;&#1091;&#1076;&#1072;&#1088;&#1089;&#1090;&#1074;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1084; &#1082;&#1086;&#1085;&#1090;&#1088;&#1072;&#1082;&#1090;&#1086;&#1084; &#1085;&#1072; &#1087;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074;&#1082;&#1091; &#1084;&#1080;&#1085;&#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1077;&#1088;&#1089;&#1090;&#1074;&#1091; &#1086;&#1073;&#1086;&#1088;&#1086;&#1085;&#1099; &#1056;&#1060; &#1074; &#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1080;&#1086;&#1076; &#1076;&#1086; 2015 &#1075;. 48 &#1057;&#1091;-35&#1057; &#1085;&#1072; &#1079;&#1072;&#1074;&#1086;&#1076;&#1077; &#1082;&#1086;&#1084;&#1087;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1080; &#1074; &#1050;&#1086;&#1084;&#1089;&#1086;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1100;&#1089;&#1082;&#1077;-&#1085;&#1072; &#1040;&#1084;&#1091;&#1088;&#1077; &#1085;&#1072;&#1083;&#1072;&#1078;&#1077;&#1085;&#1086; &#1080;&#1093; &#1089;&#1077;&#1088;&#1080;&#1081;&#1085;&#1086;&#1077; &#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1080;&#1079;&#1074;&#1086;&#1076;&#1089;&#1090;&#1074;&#1086;. &#1058;&#1077;&#1093;&#1085;&#1086;&#1083;&#1086;&#1075;&#1080;&#1080;, &#1088;&#1077;&#1072;&#1083;&#1080;&#1079;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1077; &#1074; &#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1075;&#1088;&#1072;&#1084;&#1084;&#1077; &#1057;&#1091;-35&#1057;, &#1087;&#1086;&#1079;&#1074;&#1086;&#1083;&#1103;&#1090; &#1088;&#1086;&#1089;&#1089;&#1080;&#1081;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1084; &#1042;&#1042;&#1057; &#1074; &#1086;&#1090;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1086; &#1082;&#1086;&#1088;&#1086;&#1090;&#1082;&#1080;&#1077; &#1089;&#1088;&#1086;&#1082;&#1080; &#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1074;&#1077;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080; &#1095;&#1072;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080;&#1095;&#1085;&#1086;&#1077; &#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1077;&#1074;&#1086;&#1086;&#1088;&#1091;&#1078;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1077; &#1074;&#1086;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;-&#1074;&#1086;&#1079;&#1076;&#1091;&#1096;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1089;&#1080;&#1083; &#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1072;&#1085;&#1099; &#1080; &#1086;&#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1072;&#1090;&#1080;&#1074;&#1085;&#1086; &#1086;&#1089;&#1074;&#1086;&#1080;&#1090;&#1100; &#1090;&#1077;&#1093;&#1085;&#1080;&#1082;&#1091; &#1089;&#1083;&#1077;&#1076;&#1091;&#1102;&#1097;&#1077;&#1075;&#1086; &#1087;&#1086;&#1082;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103;.

&#1053;&#1072; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1105;&#1090;&#1077; &#1057;&#1091;-35 &#8212; &#1087;&#1088;&#1080;&#1084;&#1077;&#1085;&#1077;&#1085;&#1099; &#1084;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1080;&#1077; &#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1077;&#1076;&#1086;&#1074;&#1099;&#1077; &#1090;&#1077;&#1093;&#1085;&#1086;&#1083;&#1086;&#1075;&#1080;&#1080;, &#1082;&#1086;&#1090;&#1086;&#1088;&#1099;&#1077; &#1073;&#1091;&#1076;&#1091;&#1090; &#1096;&#1080;&#1088;&#1086;&#1082;&#1086; &#1080;&#1089;&#1087;&#1086;&#1083;&#1100;&#1079;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1090;&#1100;&#1089;&#1103; &#1085;&#1072; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1105;&#1090;&#1077; &#1055;&#1040;&#1050;-&#1060;&#1040;, &#1080; &#1087;&#1086;&#1079;&#1074;&#1086;&#1083;&#1103;&#1090; &#1077;&#1084;&#1091; &#1087;&#1088;&#1077;&#1074;&#1086;&#1089;&#1093;&#1086;&#1076;&#1080;&#1090;&#1100; &#1074;&#1089;&#1077; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1105;&#1090;&#1099; &#1072;&#1085;&#1072;&#1083;&#1086;&#1075;&#1080;&#1095;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1082;&#1083;&#1072;&#1089;&#1089;&#1072;. &#1055;&#1088;&#1077;&#1078;&#1076;&#1077; &#1074;&#1089;&#1077;&#1075;&#1086;, &#1101;&#1090;&#1086; &#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1099;&#1081; &#1082;&#1086;&#1084;&#1087;&#1083;&#1077;&#1082;&#1089; &#1073;&#1086;&#1088;&#1090;&#1086;&#1074;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1086;&#1073;&#1086;&#1088;&#1091;&#1076;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103;, &#1080;&#1085;&#1090;&#1077;&#1075;&#1088;&#1080;&#1088;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1081; &#1085;&#1072; &#1073;&#1072;&#1079;&#1077; &#1080;&#1085;&#1092;&#1086;&#1088;&#1084;&#1072;&#1094;&#1080;&#1086;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;-&#1091;&#1087;&#1088;&#1072;&#1074;&#1083;&#1103;&#1102;&#1097;&#1077;&#1081; &#1089;&#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1077;&#1084;&#1099; (&#1048;&#1059;&#1057, &#1087;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1086;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1081; &#1089; &#1080;&#1089;&#1087;&#1086;&#1083;&#1100;&#1079;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1077;&#1084; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1099;&#1093; &#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1077;&#1076;&#1086;&#1074;&#1099;&#1093; &#1080;&#1085;&#1092;&#1086;&#1088;&#1084;&#1072;&#1094;&#1080;&#1086;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;-&#1090;&#1077;&#1093;&#1085;&#1086;&#1083;&#1086;&#1075;&#1080;&#1095;&#1077;&#1089;&#1082;&#1080;&#1093; &#1088;&#1077;&#1096;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1081; &#1089; &#1087;&#1088;&#1080;&#1084;&#1077;&#1085;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1077;&#1084; &#1088;&#1077;&#1079;&#1077;&#1088;&#1074;&#1080;&#1088;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1084;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086;&#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1094;&#1077;&#1089;&#1089;&#1086;&#1088;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1074;&#1099;&#1095;&#1080;&#1089;&#1083;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1089;&#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1077;&#1084; &#1080; &#1074;&#1099;&#1089;&#1086;&#1082;&#1086;&#1089;&#1082;&#1086;&#1088;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1082;&#1072;&#1085;&#1072;&#1083;&#1086;&#1074; &#1080;&#1085;&#1092;&#1086;&#1088;&#1084;&#1072;&#1094;&#1080;&#1086;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1086;&#1073;&#1084;&#1077;&#1085;&#1072;, &#1089; &#1086;&#1073;&#1077;&#1089;&#1087;&#1077;&#1095;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1077;&#1084; &#1092;&#1091;&#1085;&#1082;&#1094;&#1080;&#1080; &#1075;&#1080;&#1087;&#1086;&#1090;&#1077;&#1079;&#1085;&#1086;&#1081; &#1086;&#1073;&#1088;&#1072;&#1073;&#1086;&#1090;&#1082;&#1080; &#1080;&#1085;&#1092;&#1086;&#1088;&#1084;&#1072;&#1094;&#1080;&#1080;, &#1087;&#1086;&#1083;&#1091;&#1095;&#1072;&#1077;&#1084;&#1086;&#1081; &#1086;&#1090; &#1086;&#1073;&#1079;&#1086;&#1088;&#1085;&#1086;-&#1087;&#1088;&#1080;&#1094;&#1077;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1089;&#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1077;&#1084; &#1080; &#1086;&#1073;&#1077;&#1089;&#1087;&#1077;&#1095;&#1080;&#1074;&#1072;&#1102;&#1097;&#1080;&#1093; &#1080;&#1085;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1083;&#1077;&#1082;&#1090;&#1091;&#1072;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1091;&#1102; &#1087;&#1086;&#1076;&#1076;&#1077;&#1088;&#1078;&#1082;&#1091; &#1087;&#1080;&#1083;&#1086;&#1090;&#1072; &#1087;&#1088;&#1080; &#1088;&#1077;&#1096;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1080; &#1089;&#1083;&#1086;&#1078;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1079;&#1072;&#1076;&#1072;&#1095; &#1073;&#1086;&#1077;&#1074;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1087;&#1088;&#1080;&#1084;&#1077;&#1085;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103;. &#1053;&#1072; &#1057;&#1091;-35 &#1096;&#1080;&#1088;&#1086;&#1082;&#1086; &#1080;&#1089;&#1087;&#1086;&#1083;&#1100;&#1079;&#1091;&#1102;&#1090;&#1089;&#1103; &#1090;&#1077;&#1093;&#1085;&#1086;&#1083;&#1086;&#1075;&#1080;&#1080; &#1086;&#1073;&#1077;&#1089;&#1087;&#1077;&#1095;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; &#1089;&#1080;&#1090;&#1091;&#1072;&#1094;&#1080;&#1086;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;&#1081; &#1086;&#1089;&#1074;&#1077;&#1076;&#1086;&#1084;&#1083;&#1105;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080; &#1074; &#1089;&#1092;&#1077;&#1088;&#1080;&#1095;&#1077;&#1089;&#1082;&#1086;&#1084; &#1080;&#1085;&#1092;&#1086;&#1088;&#1084;&#1072;&#1094;&#1080;&#1086;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;&#1084; &#1087;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077; &#1080; &#1074; &#1088;&#1077;&#1072;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1086;&#1084; &#1084;&#1072;&#1089;&#1096;&#1090;&#1072;&#1073;&#1077; &#1074;&#1088;&#1077;&#1084;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080; &#1079;&#1072; &#1089;&#1095;&#1105;&#1090; &#1080;&#1089;&#1087;&#1086;&#1083;&#1100;&#1079;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; &#1074;&#1086;&#1079;&#1084;&#1086;&#1078;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1077;&#1081; &#1082;&#1086;&#1084;&#1087;&#1083;&#1077;&#1082;&#1089;&#1072; &#1089;&#1088;&#1077;&#1076;&#1089;&#1090;&#1074; &#1089;&#1074;&#1103;&#1079;&#1080;, &#1088;&#1072;&#1076;&#1080;&#1086;&#1083;&#1086;&#1082;&#1072;&#1094;&#1080;&#1086;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093;, &#1086;&#1087;&#1090;&#1080;&#1082;&#1086;-&#1101;&#1083;&#1077;&#1082;&#1090;&#1088;&#1086;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1086;&#1073;&#1079;&#1086;&#1088;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1080; &#1088;&#1072;&#1079;&#1074;&#1077;&#1076;&#1099;&#1074;&#1072;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1089;&#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1077;&#1084; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1105;&#1090;&#1072;, &#1072; &#1090;&#1072;&#1082;&#1078;&#1077; &#1080; &#1085;&#1072;&#1079;&#1077;&#1084;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1089;&#1080;&#1089;&#1090;&#1077;&#1084; &#1091;&#1087;&#1088;&#1072;&#1074;&#1083;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; &#1088;&#1072;&#1079;&#1083;&#1080;&#1095;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1091;&#1088;&#1086;&#1074;&#1085;&#1103;. &#1050;&#1088;&#1086;&#1084;&#1077; &#1090;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086;, &#1085;&#1072; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1105;&#1090;&#1077; &#1091;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1083;&#1077;&#1085;&#1099; &#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1099;&#1077; &#1076;&#1074;&#1080;&#1075;&#1072;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1080; (&#1072;&#1085;&#1072;&#1083;&#1086;&#1075;&#1080;&#1095;&#1085;&#1099;&#1077; &#1076;&#1074;&#1080;&#1075;&#1072;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1103;&#1084; &#1055;&#1040;&#1050;-&#1060;&#1040 &#1089; &#1091;&#1074;&#1077;&#1083;&#1080;&#1095;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;&#1081; &#1090;&#1103;&#1075;&#1086;&#1081; &#1080; &#1087;&#1086;&#1074;&#1086;&#1088;&#1086;&#1090;&#1085;&#1099;&#1084; &#1074;&#1077;&#1082;&#1090;&#1086;&#1088;&#1086;&#1084; &#1090;&#1103;&#1075;&#1080;, &#1074;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1086;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1072;&#1103; &#1074;&#1089;&#1087;&#1086;&#1084;&#1086;&#1075;&#1072;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1072;&#1103; &#1089;&#1080;&#1083;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1103; &#1091;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1082;&#1072; (&#1042;&#1057;&#1059, &#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1103; &#1088;&#1072;&#1076;&#1080;&#1086;&#1083;&#1086;&#1082;&#1072;&#1094;&#1080;&#1086;&#1085;&#1085;&#1072;&#1103; &#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1085;&#1094;&#1080;&#1103; (&#1056;&#1051;&#1057. &#1055;&#1088;&#1080;&#1095;&#1105;&#1084; &#1056;&#1051;&#1057; &#1089; &#1092;&#1072;&#1079;&#1080;&#1088;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;&#1081; &#1072;&#1085;&#1090;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;&#1081; &#1088;&#1077;&#1096;&#1077;&#1090;&#1082;&#1086;&#1081; &#1080;&#1084;&#1077;&#1077;&#1090; &#1073;&#1086;&#1083;&#1100;&#1096;&#1091;&#1102; &#1076;&#1072;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1100; &#1086;&#1073;&#1085;&#1072;&#1088;&#1091;&#1078;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; &#1074;&#1086;&#1079;&#1076;&#1091;&#1096;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1094;&#1077;&#1083;&#1077;&#1081; &#1089; &#1091;&#1074;&#1077;&#1083;&#1080;&#1095;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1084; &#1095;&#1080;&#1089;&#1083;&#1086;&#1084; &#1086;&#1076;&#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1088;&#1077;&#1084;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086; &#1089;&#1086;&#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1074;&#1086;&#1078;&#1076;&#1072;&#1077;&#1084;&#1099;&#1093; &#1080; &#1086;&#1073;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1077;&#1083;&#1080;&#1074;&#1072;&#1077;&#1084;&#1099;&#1093; &#1094;&#1077;&#1083;&#1077;&#1081; (&#1089;&#1086;&#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1074;&#1086;&#1078;&#1076;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1077; 30 &#1080; &#1072;&#1090;&#1072;&#1082;&#1072; 8 &#1074;&#1086;&#1079;&#1076;&#1091;&#1096;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1094;&#1077;&#1083;&#1077;&#1081;, &#1086;&#1076;&#1085;&#1086;&#1074;&#1088;&#1077;&#1084;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1081; &#1086;&#1073;&#1079;&#1086;&#1088; &#1074;&#1086;&#1079;&#1076;&#1091;&#1096;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1080; &#1085;&#1072;&#1079;&#1077;&#1084;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1088;&#1072;&#1085;&#1089;&#1090;&#1074;&#1072;, &#1072; &#1090;&#1072;&#1082;&#1078;&#1077; &#1089;&#1086;&#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1074;&#1086;&#1078;&#1076;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1077; 4 &#1080; &#1072;&#1090;&#1072;&#1082;&#1072; 2 &#1085;&#1072;&#1079;&#1077;&#1084;&#1085;&#1099;&#1093; &#1094;&#1077;&#1083;&#1077;&#1081. &#1057;&#1091;-35 &#1086;&#1090;&#1083;&#1080;&#1095;&#1072;&#1077;&#1090;&#1089;&#1103; &#1096;&#1080;&#1088;&#1086;&#1082;&#1086;&#1081; &#1085;&#1086;&#1084;&#1077;&#1085;&#1082;&#1083;&#1072;&#1090;&#1091;&#1088;&#1086;&#1081; &#1074;&#1086;&#1086;&#1088;&#1091;&#1078;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; &#1073;&#1086;&#1083;&#1100;&#1096;&#1086;&#1081;, &#1089;&#1088;&#1077;&#1076;&#1085;&#1077;&#1081; &#1080; &#1084;&#1072;&#1083;&#1086;&#1081; &#1076;&#1072;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080;. &#1054;&#1085; &#1089;&#1087;&#1086;&#1089;&#1086;&#1073;&#1077;&#1085; &#1085;&#1077;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080; 8000 &#1082;&#1075; &#1073;&#1086;&#1077;&#1074;&#1086;&#1081; &#1085;&#1072;&#1075;&#1088;&#1091;&#1079;&#1082;&#1080;, &#1074;&#1082;&#1083;&#1102;&#1095;&#1072;&#1102;&#1097;&#1077;&#1081; &#1091;&#1087;&#1088;&#1072;&#1074;&#1083;&#1103;&#1077;&#1084;&#1099;&#1077; &#1072;&#1074;&#1080;&#1072;&#1094;&#1080;&#1086;&#1085;&#1085;&#1099;&#1077; &#1089;&#1088;&#1077;&#1076;&#1089;&#1090;&#1074;&#1072; &#1087;&#1086;&#1088;&#1072;&#1078;&#1077;&#1085;&#1080;&#1103; (&#1040;&#1057;&#1055 &#1089;&#1088;&#1077;&#1076;&#1085;&#1077;&#1081; &#1080; &#1073;&#1086;&#1083;&#1100;&#1096;&#1086;&#1081; &#1076;&#1072;&#1083;&#1100;&#1085;&#1086;&#1089;&#1090;&#1080; &#1087;&#1086; &#1074;&#1086;&#1079;&#1076;&#1091;&#1096;&#1085;&#1099;&#1084; &#1080; &#1085;&#1072;&#1079;&#1077;&#1084;&#1085;&#1099;&#1084; &#1094;&#1077;&#1083;&#1103;&#1084; &#8212; &#1072;&#1085;&#1090;&#1080;-&#1056;&#1051;&#1057;, &#1072;&#1085;&#1090;&#1080;-&#1082;&#1086;&#1088;&#1072;&#1073;&#1083;&#1100;, &#1082;&#1086;&#1088;&#1088;&#1077;&#1082;&#1090;&#1080;&#1088;&#1091;&#1077;&#1084;&#1099;&#1077; &#1072;&#1074;&#1080;&#1072;&#1073;&#1086;&#1084;&#1073;&#1099; (&#1050;&#1040;&#1041, &#1072; &#1090;&#1072;&#1082;&#1078;&#1077; &#1085;&#1077;&#1091;&#1087;&#1088;&#1072;&#1074;&#1083;&#1103;&#1077;&#1084;&#1099;&#1077; &#1040;&#1057;&#1055;.

&#1055;&#1088;&#1086;&#1076;&#1091;&#1082;&#1094;&#1080;&#1103; &#1054;&#1040;&#1050; &#1087;&#1088;&#1077;&#1076;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074;&#1083;&#1077;&#1085;&#1072; &#1085;&#1072; &#1072;&#1074;&#1080;&#1072;&#1089;&#1072;&#1083;&#1086;&#1085;&#1077; &#1074; &#1057;&#1080;&#1085;&#1075;&#1072;&#1087;&#1091;&#1088;&#1077; &#1088;&#1103;&#1076;&#1086;&#1084; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1086;&#1074; &#1074;&#1086;&#1077;&#1085;&#1085;&#1086;&#1081; &#1080; &#1075;&#1088;&#1072;&#1078;&#1076;&#1072;&#1085;&#1089;&#1082;&#1086;&#1081; &#1072;&#1074;&#1080;&#1072;&#1094;&#1080;&#1080;, &#1074;&#1099;&#1087;&#1091;&#1089;&#1082;&#1072;&#1077;&#1084;&#1099;&#1093; &#1087;&#1088;&#1077;&#1076;&#1087;&#1088;&#1080;&#1103;&#1090;&#1080;&#1103;&#1084;&#1080; &#1082;&#1086;&#1088;&#1087;&#1086;&#1088;&#1072;&#1094;&#1080;&#1080;. &#1050;&#1088;&#1086;&#1084;&#1077; &#1057;&#1091;-35 &#1085;&#1072; &#1089;&#1090;&#1077;&#1085;&#1076;&#1077; &#1073;&#1091;&#1076;&#1091;&#1090; &#1074;&#1099;&#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1074;&#1083;&#1077;&#1085;&#1099; &#1084;&#1086;&#1076;&#1077;&#1083;&#1080; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1086;&#1074; &#1071;&#1082;-130, &#1057;&#1091;&#1093;&#1086;&#1081; &#1057;&#1091;&#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1076;&#1078;&#1077;&#1090; 100 &#1080; MC-21. &#1053;&#1072; &#1089;&#1090;&#1072;&#1090;&#1080;&#1095;&#1077;&#1089;&#1082;&#1086;&#1081; &#1089;&#1090;&#1086;&#1103;&#1085;&#1082;&#1077; &#1087;&#1086;&#1089;&#1077;&#1090;&#1080;&#1090;&#1077;&#1083;&#1080; &#1089;&#1072;&#1083;&#1086;&#1085;&#1072; &#1089;&#1084;&#1086;&#1075;&#1091;&#1090; &#1086;&#1079;&#1085;&#1072;&#1082;&#1086;&#1084;&#1080;&#1090;&#1100;&#1089;&#1103; &#1089; &#1089;&#1072;&#1084;&#1086;&#1083;&#1077;&#1090;&#1086;&#1084;-&#1072;&#1084;&#1092;&#1080;&#1073;&#1080;&#1077;&#1081; &#1041;&#1077;-200 &#1080; &#1087;&#1086;&#1083;&#1085;&#1086;&#1088;&#1072;&#1079;&#1084;&#1077;&#1088;&#1085;&#1099;&#1084; &#1084;&#1072;&#1082;&#1077;&#1090;&#1086;&#1084; &#1082;&#1072;&#1073;&#1080;&#1085;&#1099; &#1080; &#1089;&#1072;&#1083;&#1086;&#1085;&#1072; &#1087;&#1077;&#1088;&#1089;&#1087;&#1077;&#1082;&#1090;&#1080;&#1074;&#1085;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1087;&#1072;&#1089;&#1089;&#1072;&#1078;&#1080;&#1088;&#1089;&#1082;&#1086;&#1075;&#1086; &#1072;&#1074;&#1080;&#1072;&#1083;&#1072;&#1081;&#1085;&#1077;&#1088;&#1072; &#1052;&#1057;-21.

____________________________________

Moscow, February 13. The company "Dry" is the first time in the pop-up tomorrow, February 14, international air show Singapore Air Show 2012 multirole fighter generation "4 +" Su-35. On the stand of the United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), which includes holding a model airplane will be exposed. Visitors to the exhibition and experts will be able to look at its performance characteristics and to discuss with representatives of "Sukhoi" the prospects for its supply of military forces in the region. The company is currently negotiating with foreign customers who are interested in re its air force. The Su-35 are scheduled for delivery in the South-East Asia, Middle East and South America. New contracts will support the high competitiveness of Russia on the world market before the release of fighters in 2016-2025, the market, the fifth-generation fighter.

Design and manufacture of super-maneuverable multirole fighter generation "4 +" Su-35 (Su-35s in the Russian version) is one of the priority programs of the company "Sukhoi". At present, the Su-35-1, 2 are state-Integration Tests (SIT). At the same time was connected to them and the first production Su-35S-1, and earlier this year, the Su-35S-2. The third and fourth production aircraft will be connected to the ICG, in the near future. The Su-35, 1, 2, carried out preliminary flight tests, during which were fully confirmed by the established main flight and technical characteristics of the onboard equipment and features super maneuverability, tested stability and controllability characteristics, the characteristics of the power plant, the work of the navigation system. Reached the maximum speed at sea level is 1400 km., At an altitude of - 2400 km \ h, the ceiling - 18 thousand meters detection range goals in the "air" - "air" - more than 400 km. This significantly higher than that faced in service aircraft. Airborne radar can detect and track multiple targets at ranges exceeding 80 km. As part of flight testing on the fighters were more than 400 flights. The complex is ready to undergo tests for combat use.

The analysis carried out by the amount of work can already be concluded that Su-35/Su-35S has a much better flight characteristics compared to standing on arms machine-analogues, and installed a set of airborne equipment allows us to solve a wide range of problems identified tactical and technical requirements. Incorporated in the aircraft will exceed the potential characteristics of all tactical fighters generation 4 and 4 + type «Rafale» and EF 2000, modernized fighters like the F-15, F-16s, F-18, F-35 aircraft to counter the F-22A.

Su-35s and promising aviation complex fifth-generation (PAK FA) will determine the level of defense of Russia. In accordance with the prisoners in the 2009 state contract to supply the Ministry of Defence in 2015, 48 Su-35s on the company's plant in Komsomolsk-on Amur adjusted their production. Technologies implemented in the program of the Su-35s, will allow the Russian air force in a relatively short period of time to carry out partial modernization of the air forces of the country and quickly master the technique of the next generation.

The Su-35 - used many advanced technologies that will be widely used on the aircraft PAK-FA, and allow him to surpass all the aircraft in its class. First of all, this is a new set of airborne equipment, based on an integrated management information system (MIS), which was built using the most advanced information technology solutions with the use of redundant multiprocessor systems and high-speed channels of information exchange, providing functions gipoteznoy processing of information received from surveillance-aiming systems and providing intellectual support to the pilot when solving complex tasks of combat employment. The Su-35 is widely used technologies provide situational awareness information in a spherical field and in real time by using the capabilities of the complex communication, radar, electro-optical survey and reconnaissance aircraft, as well as ground-based control systems at various levels. In addition, the aircraft is new engines (similar engines PAK-FA) with increased traction and turning thrust vectoring, integrated auxiliary power unit (APU), a new radar (radar). And the radar with a phased antenna array has a large range of detection of air targets with the increased number of simultaneously tracked and engaged targets (support for 30 and 8 attack air targets, simultaneous review of the air and land space, as well as support for 4 and 2 attack ground targets). The Su-35 has a broad nomenclature of arms of large, medium and short range. It can carry 8,000 kg of payload, including controlled air attack (TSA) medium and long range air and surface targets - an anti-radar, anti-ship guided aerial bombs (KAB), as well as unmanaged ASP.

Products represented by the KLA at the air show in Singapore next Aircraft military and civil aircraft, manufactured by the enterprises of the corporation. In addition to the Su-35 on the stand will be on display models of aircraft Yak-130, Sukhoi Superjet 100 and MC-21. On static display visitors will be able to see the interior amphibious aircraft Be-200 and full-size mock cockpit and cabin prospective airliner MS-21.


_________________________________


ÎÀÎ "Êîìïàíèÿ "Ñóõîé" - Íîâîñòè - Íîâîñòè êîìïàíèè

indians come out !!!!

what are you gonna say now????




________________________________________________

*Here is the English Version of the Official Sukhoi Company:

Go read it yourself !!*

http://www.sukhoi.org/eng/


----------



## TalkToMe:D

Hell I dont know to read Russian


----------



## ptldM3

artaxerces said:


> "China hired a Russian company to help develop to electronics for the PL-12."
> 
> Of course, however that does not negate Speeder2's point.





Of course it does, his point was as vague as it gets. 





artaxerces said:


> Technical Cooperation with AGAT in the mid 90s was useful when the Russian electronics industry had a significant technological lead.





Where is the source stating AGAT&#8217;s cooperation occurred in the mid 1990&#8217;s? It is also interesting that with China&#8217;s superior electronics industry that it has recently ordered Russian anti-submarine helicopters.





artaxerces said:


> But 15 years down the line, the scale and scope of the Chinese domestic electronics industry is about an order of magnitude larger than Russia.




What is that even supposed to mean? Really?




artaxerces said:


> Moreover, would you not agree that the relative capabilities of the Russian Electronics Industry has actually atrophied over the last 15 years due to the destruction of it's supply chain ecosystem? In this respect, Chinese's aircraft companies would have access to substantially more(and better) dual-use commercial technologies than Russia would.




Another vague one liners. The Russian electronics industry is by far in a greater state today than it was 15 years ago. Moreover, your assumption that China&#8217;s commercial electronics industry is &#8216;better&#8217; is based on what? China&#8217;s massive population and the ability to provide cheap products for the world&#8217;s consumers will insure high revenues, which than in tern props Chinese companies to occupy positions of top semi-conductor companies. If we use Israel as an example we would see that Israel is one of the top countries in building quality military products, but you will not find many Israeli companies occupying top civil positions. But somehow the Israelis were one of the first countries with the ability to produce AESA radars. Ironic isn&#8217;t it?

And your assertion that China has better access to commercial technologies is simply false. There are foreign companies in the US, France, Israel, South Korea, ect that sell their goods to Russia, heck some of these companies have even sold Russia military technologies. In other words, if Russian companies are having difficulty with processors they always have to option of looking the various other countries and in the end a much better product will result.


----------



## sweetgrape

> i cant understand one thing why the same news is highlighted so much , that many thread on this same topic is posted in this section .


Before the news, Why don't ask your indian why they highlighted the same fake news? For a long time, the Russia media have publish many fake news to defame china military to attract someone's eye, they need the indent!! I don't think all or most of indian believe the fake news, if they are troll, they will mock china, not for the fake news.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## marshall

Speeder 2 said:


> As i said previously in another forum, the only thing in Su-35 that is clearly superior to J-11B is its 3D vector engine. Yet there is no need for China to waste $ 4B for that, since it's not ideal either for J-20 or as a WS-15 backup. With all that money, brains and time imput, WS-15 must succeed without any backup, and so far all the news/rumors on it are positive.


There is speculation that the WS-15 will eventually be adapted for the J-10B and J-11B. I haven't found any official sources with the WS-15 specifications besides projected thrust, but if it is within 95% of its design targets, that would be a dry thrust of 115-120kN with a thrust to weight _(dry thrust)_ of 0.90-0.95 for the J-10B and 0.975-1.0275 for the J-11B. These are close to the performance numbers of the current J-10B and J-11B with their WS-10A engines at full throttle where their top speeds are mach 2.0 and 2.35 respectively. With the WS-15, they will be able to go supersonic without coming close to pushing the engines and will have a very respectable supercruise top speed, especially the J-11B. It might sound unbelievable but with this sort of dry thrust / thrust weight ratios, the supercruise speeds you arrive it would be around mach 1.80 for the J-10B and around mach 2.10 for the J-11B. Wow!




Speeder 2 said:


> Futhermore, PLAAF is simplifying its logistics with datalinks among all major jet breeds. Su-35 would be a very expensive sore thumb that is both deaf and blind in this regard should the purchase were made, since Russia would be unlikley to give China access to its sourcecodes or even permission to facilitate datalink and other advanced communications.


Good observation. The original batches of SU-27SK/SU-27UBK couldn't fire Chinese missiles because Russia refused access to these very things. It's likely that China will eventually datalink all its air assets, not that they probably aren't already in this process now. Very useful if you are datalinked to an illuminating L-Band AWAC, if you know what I mean.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## artaxerces

"If we use Israel as an example we would see that Israel is one of the top countries in building quality military products, but you will not find many Israeli companies occupying top civil positions. But somehow the Israelis were one of the first countries with the ability to produce AESA radars. Ironic isnt it?"

Don't confuse Demographics with industrial scale and capability. Tiny Israel is in the top 10 nations in absolute dollar terms from their semi-conductor design and manufacturing industry. So their military has a huge civilian electronics ecosystem to tap into.

http://www.ivc-online.com/upload/archive/IVCJ/IVCJ-09-04.pdf

China has such an ecosystem as well, but Russia does not at this point. So while larger populations generally means greater industrial capability, Israel is an exception to the rule.


"And your assertion that China has better access to commercial technologies is simply false. There are foreign companies in the US, France, Israel, South Korea, ect that sell their goods to Russia, heck some of these companies have even sold Russia military technologies. In other words, if Russian companies are having difficulty with processors they always have to option of looking the various other countries and in the end a much better product will result."

Every country's corporations is in every other country's business. My point is that to actually use COTS(technologies, industrial processes, and skilled personnel) effectively, you need a large and agile civilian industrial supply chain that military development companies can tap into. What if you needed to modify that COTS processor from France? Maybe you need to amp up the cycle time, make it more tolerant of temperature extremes...etc? Commercial Sub-contractors that can modify their technologies to suit specific needs quickly and cost effectively is not in short supply in China. 

But in Russia, while they can get examples of COTS technology from other countries, re-factoring such technology to be militarily effective is much more difficult. Instead of leveraging a large commercial industrial infrastructure and personnel, Russia would need to create in-house single-purpose applications of any particular COTS implementation(along with growing the human resources to match). And this process is going to be necessarily slower and more costly. Scaling out the production of such a modified implementation is even more difficult since you can't be dependent on the manufacturing infrastructure of another country and still maintain independent production capability of such a weapons system.



Now Russia had such a massive industrial ecosystem during Soviet times, but it has decayed significantly since their heyday. There are always going to be exceptions. But overall, you should be able to see what I'm saying.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

I believe if  China really wants to buy Su-35 mean that there is technologies that are not available yet even in J-20 that we want to acquire...48 Su-35 will certainly not the number to defend entire China. I guess China's intention is very obvious...to upgrade the basic SU-27 and J-11 family with Su-35 technologies.

Some aspect of J-20 will certainly be served as Benchmark and as guideline to evaluate Su-35 since China has throw alot of money onto J-20...

For 4 billions or 85 millions per aircraft Russia better put something worthed and valuables on the table...China certianly will not take any crap or left over of the dinner...only intersting proposition will have chance to get the deal through.

of course if the deal didn't got through...this 4 billions $$$$ can be alway found it place in China's R&D to further improve J-11 familly ourself.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Black Widow

mash-allah no news is better than this


----------



## April.lyrics

better if immerge these Su-35 threads in one.


----------



## FairAndUnbiased

artaxerces said:


> "If we use Israel as an example we would see that Israel is one of the top countries in building quality military products, but you will not find many Israeli companies occupying top civil positions. But somehow the Israelis were one of the first countries with the ability to produce AESA radars. Ironic isn&#8217;t it?"
> 
> Don't confuse Demographics with industrial scale and capability. Tiny Israel is in the top 10 nations in absolute dollar terms from their semi-conductor design and manufacturing industry. So their military has a huge civilian electronics ecosystem to tap into.
> 
> http://www.ivc-online.com/upload/archive/IVCJ/IVCJ-09-04.pdf
> 
> China has such an ecosystem as well, but Russia does not at this point. So while larger populations generally means greater industrial capability, Israel is an exception to the rule.
> 
> 
> "And your assertion that China has better access to commercial technologies is simply false. There are foreign companies in the US, France, Israel, South Korea, ect that sell their goods to Russia, heck some of these companies have even sold Russia military technologies. In other words, if Russian companies are having difficulty with processors they always have to option of looking the various other countries and in the end a much better product will result."
> 
> Every country's corporations is in every other country's business. My point is that to actually use COTS(technologies, industrial processes, and skilled personnel) effectively, you need a large and agile civilian industrial supply chain that military development companies can tap into. What if you needed to modify that COTS processor from France? Maybe you need to amp up the cycle time, make it more tolerant of temperature extremes...etc? Commercial Sub-contractors that can modify their technologies to suit specific needs quickly and cost effectively is not in short supply in China.
> 
> But in Russia, while they can get examples of COTS technology from other countries, re-factoring such technology to be militarily effective is much more difficult. Instead of leveraging a large commercial industrial infrastructure and personnel, Russia would need to create in-house single-purpose applications of any particular COTS implementation(along with growing the human resources to match). And this process is going to be necessarily slower and more costly. Scaling out the production of such a modified implementation is even more difficult since you can't be dependent on the manufacturing infrastructure of another country and still maintain independent production capability of such a weapons system.
> 
> 
> 
> Now Russia had such a massive industrial ecosystem during Soviet times, but it has decayed significantly since their heyday. There are always going to be exceptions. But overall, you should be able to see what I'm saying.



Israel is actually good in semiconductors? I only know they have a top pureplay foundry but not much in overall (including design). How come I've never even heard of an example of any Israeli chip for any processor application? Is there a phone, TV, computer, etc. that uses an Israeli chip? I've only heard of Chinese, Japanese, Korean, US and European chips for these applications. Intel plants in Israel don't count.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Developereo

I suspect there is much more military cooperation going on between Russia and China than either country admits. Russia likes the money and to stir the pot, but doesn't want to upset the Indians, Japanese or the West too much. China obviously wants to keep everything mum. As much as the Chinese indigenous capabilities are advancing, there is still plenty to learn from the Russians.


----------



## conworldus

Developereo said:


> I suspect there is much more military cooperation going on between Russia and China than either country admits. Russia likes the money and to stir the pot, but doesn't want to upset the Indians, Japanese or the West too much. China obviously wants to keep everything mum. As much as the Chinese indigenous capabilities are advancing, there is still plenty to learn from the Russians.



come on, we chinese are not that dumb. we have been learning from the russians since 1990. i think any moron shouldnhave learned everything already. with economy 4 times bigger than russia and r and d investment also several times, unless we are just stupidder than russiana, we should have surpassed them. it is not like 5he russians were that advanced to start with.


----------



## gambit

FairAndUnbiased said:


> Israel is actually good in semiconductors? I only know they have a top pureplay foundry but not much in overall (including design). How come I've never even heard of an example of any Israeli chip for any processor application? Is there a phone, TV, computer, etc. that uses an Israeli chip? I've only heard of Chinese, Japanese, Korean, US and European chips for these applications. *Intel plants in Israel don't count.*


Why not? But I guess keyword search for 'israel semiconductor industry' is too difficult to perform? Does not need to have a processor in order to be considered top tier in semicon.


----------



## oct605032048

Secur said:


> Where are the jumping Indians at the moment ?



They are probably jumping on their own face.


----------



## AerospaceEngineer

It is so funny that:

mere indians, russian fanboys, and japanesesesesesesee ALL achieved ultra high orgasm just 5 days ago, when the fake news came out.

lol, now they are all having group depression, hahaha.

Imagine how many indians on the streets of india are taking anti-depression drugs now.


----------



## ao333

gambit said:


> Why not? But I guess keyword search for 'israel semiconductor industry' is too difficult to perform? Does not need to have a processor in order to be considered top tier in semicon.



WTF, when Vietnamese and Vladivostokis receive the right to talk down on Chinese? Viets are discriminated in America and "Russians" born in Asian Russia are lesser beings compared to those in Moscow.

You guys are comparable to Indians. Pathetic.


----------



## ptldM3

artaxerces said:


> Don't confuse Demographics with industrial scale and capability. Tiny Israel is in the top 10 nations in absolute dollar terms from their semi-conductor design and manufacturing industry. So their military has a huge civilian electronics ecosystem to tap into.





Right, so Israel is a top 10 country in semiconductor revenue? And the source for that is? By your logic leading semiconductor countries such as South Korea and Japan should be able to produce world class military technologies but they do not, at best they produce good systems but fall behind due to their weak military industrial complexes. In other words both countries have the technology to built radars but limited knowledge in how to do so when compared to other companies that specialize in the field radar development.





artaxerces said:


> China has such an ecosystem as well, but Russia does not at this point. So while larger populations generally means greater industrial capability, Israel is an exception to the rule.



By ecosystem do you mean producing electronics for children&#8217;s toys? It&#8217;s also no secret that China&#8217;s leads the world in IT theft, much of what comes out of the Chinese semiconductor industries is ripped off or blatantly stolen from other companies.






artaxerces said:


> Every country's corporations is in every other country's business. My point is that to actually use COTS(technologies, industrial processes, and skilled personnel) effectively, you need a large and agile civilian industrial supply chain that military development companies can tap into. What if you needed to modify that COTS processor from France? Maybe you need to amp up the cycle time, make it more tolerant of temperature extremes...etc? Commercial Sub-contractors that can modify their technologies to suit specific needs quickly and cost effectively is not in short supply in China.




You make too many assumption. Russia has both civil and state owned companies that specialize in electronics. Russia even has highest college graduation rates in the world if that makes you sleep better. 

Russia has integrated foreign systems into the SU-30MKM and even into the International Space Station, don&#8217;t be naive to think Russia does not has the capacity to integrate or modify systems. It&#8217;s also interesting that you speak of &#8216;taping into&#8217; civilian industrial suppliers. I already knew that you were oblivious to the fact that the top semiconductor industries in the world have sold technology to Russia that it than incorporated into military use. There are a number of US based companies that provide electronics even semiconductor giants such as Toshiba has provided technology for quieter submarines. 

The big shocker is that *Russia has technologies from the EF-2000 as well as Rafale*, and no your eyes do not deceive you, that is not a typo. Russian Migs have the Virgilius internal AESA based ECM suit that is equipped on EF-2000&#8217;s and Sukhoi license produces the Thales Damocles targeting pod which is found on the Rafale. China wouldn&#8217;t be able to touch those technologies with a 20 foot pole due to China&#8217;s poor reputation in violating intellectual property.

It does not stop there, even Israel is willing to sell technology such as UAV&#8217;s to Russia while Israel cancelled the program to modernize low end UAV&#8217;s for China. Most companies will have nothing to do with China, while on the other hand are willing to work with Russia, so at the end of the day it is Russia that is &#8216;taping into&#8217; advanced technologies both civil and military, both foreign and domestic.



artaxerces said:


> But in Russia, while they can get examples of COTS technology from other countries, re-factoring such technology to be militarily effective is much more difficult. Instead of leveraging a large commercial industrial infrastructure and personnel, Russia would need to create in-house single-purpose applications of any particular COTS implementation(along with growing the human resources to match). And this process is going to be necessarily slower and more costly. Scaling out the production of such a modified implementation is even more difficult since you can't be dependent on the manufacturing infrastructure of another country and still maintain independent production capability of such a weapons system.



Again you have a bad habit of making assumptions, you have zero proof that Russia would need create an &#8216;in house&#8217; team to accomplish COTS. Russia has countless private as well as state owned companies that specialize in everything from civil products, to military applications, many of these companies have thousands of employees working for them, thus modifying or improving products would not be a difficult task. This is an advanced industrialized country not Zimbabwe.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ptldM3

conworldus said:


> come on, we chinese are not that dumb. we have been learning from the russians since 1990. i think any moron shouldnhave learned everything already. with economy 4 times bigger than russia and r and d investment also several times, unless we are just stupidder than russiana, we should have surpassed them. it is not like 5he russians were that advanced to start with.



By that token you should be miles ahead of Israel and have the ability to make an engine with half decent MTBO's. But last i checked little Israel developed AESA technology long before China ever did. Chinese engines also have poor MTBO's compared to modern Russian ones and i still fail to see any TVC capability dispite the years of talk.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## FairAndUnbiased

ptldM3 said:


> By that token you should be miles ahead of Israel and have the ability to make an engine with half decent MTBO's. But last i checked little Israel developed AESA technology long before China ever did. Chinese engines also have poor MTBO's compared to modern Russian ones and i still fail to see any TVC capability dispite the years of talk.


 
and now we're the 2nd nation to deploy AWACs with AESA radar. even US's E-3 is a mechanically steered radar.

Huawei leads the world in optical communications and chip design; the fastest smartphone in the world (by Huawei) uses an in-house quad core Huawei chip instead of buying them the way everyone else, including Apple, does.

Huawei Claims World's Fastest Phone At MWC 2012 | TechTree.com

while this is just a consumer good, it shows that China has what it takes to be a top tier player in electronics. Huawei is not the only company in China capable of doing this; we also have ZTE. And if we have 2 civilian companies that can do it, what about our public sector, which is 40 years older than these civilian companies?

thrust vectoring is a nice trick but the added cost and weight is not worth it when you can have similar maneuverability at lower cost with a superior aerodynamic design.


----------



## Zabaniyah

ao333 said:


> WTF, when Vietnamese and Vladivostokis receive the right to talk down on Chinese? Viets are discriminated in America and "Russians" born in Asian Russia are lesser beings compared to those in Moscow.
> 
> You guys are comparable to Indians. Pathetic.



You mad bro?


----------



## qwerrty

ptldM3 said:


> Right, so Israel is a top 10 country in semiconductor revenue? And the source for that is? By your logic leading semiconductor countries such as South Korea and Japan should be able to produce world class military technologies but they do not, at best they produce good systems but fall behind due to their weak military industrial complexes. In other words both countries have the technology to built radars but limited knowledge in how to do so when compared to other companies that specialize in the field radar development.



J/APG-1 made by NEC was the first AESA radar to go into service on a fighter 20 years ago. J/APG-2 is comparable to APG-79.



> By ecosystem do you mean producing electronics for children&#8217;s toys? It&#8217;s also no secret that China&#8217;s leads the world in IT theft, much of what comes out of the Chinese semiconductor industries is ripped off or blatantly stolen from other companies.



ZTE Ranked No.1 and huawei No.3 in WIPO (Global Patent Application). each has very large contribution in next-gen telecom standards.lolz
multile chinese fabless producing communication and application processcors competing with TI, qualcom..ect

*ttp://www.szcpost.com/2012/03/zte-ranked-no-1-of-global-patent-application.html



> You make too many assumption. Russia has both civil and state owned companies that specialize in electronics. Russia even has highest college graduation rates in the world if that makes you sleep better.
> 
> Russia has integrated foreign systems into the SU-30MKM and even into the International Space Station, don&#8217;t be naive to think Russia does not has the capacity to integrate or modify systems. It&#8217;s also interesting that you speak of &#8216;taping into&#8217; civilian industrial suppliers. I already knew that you were oblivious to the fact that the top semiconductor industries in the world have sold technology to Russia that it than incorporated into military use. There are a number of US based companies that provide electronics even semiconductor giants such as Toshiba has provided technology for quieter submarines.
> 
> The big shocker is that *Russia has technologies from the EF-2000 as well as Rafale*, and no your eyes do not deceive you, that is not a typo. Russian Migs have the Virgilius internal AESA based ECM suit that is equipped on EF-2000&#8217;s and Sukhoi license produces the Thales Damocles targeting pod which is found on the Rafale. China wouldn&#8217;t be able to touch those technologies with a 20 foot pole due to China&#8217;s poor reputation in violating intellectual property.
> 
> It does not stop there, even Israel is willing to sell technology such as UAV&#8217;s to Russia while Israel cancelled the program to modernize low end UAV&#8217;s for China. Most companies will have nothing to do with China, while on the other hand are willing to work with Russia, so at the end of the day it is Russia that is &#8216;taping into&#8217; advanced technologies both civil and military, both foreign and domestic.



russia doesn't have advance electronics need to import from other countries. why telling us what we already know?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ptldM3

qwerrty said:


> J/APG-1 made by NEC was the first AESA radar to go into service on a fighter 20 years ago. J/APG-2 is comparable to APG-79.



Yes they did except it was not very good and it was Japanese. And just because Aviation Week says that there is a &#8216;hint&#8217; that the radar may be comparable to the APG-79 does not mean it is. 









qwerrty said:


> russia doesn't have advance electronics need to import from other countries. why telling us what we already know?




A Chinese guy mocking Russia on importing, that is rich. I bet you were clueless that even the United States imports some weapons/systems from abroad. The point is Russia has access to technology that China can only dream of. Don&#8217;t expect to even touch let alone sniff the Typhoon&#8217;s Virgilus ECM suit or the Thales targeting pod . And yes China still imports from Russia, so the joke is on you.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## tunguska

Dear ptldM3 , You are enormously right.


----------



## ziaulislam

we know that russians are ahead of chinese even todaqy despite 20 years of transfer of technology..
but what about the next 5-10 years..china is spending 4 times more on we pons , research and copying than Hussain are..its only logical that in next few years china wouldnt need russia..we are already seeing the signs of this, whether we like to believe it or not..
in next 5-10 years china will be competing with USA in race of technology far ahead from any country

---------- Post added at 02:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:02 PM ----------

we know that russians are ahead of chinese even todaqy despite 20 years of transfer of technology..
but what about the next 5-10 years..china is spending 4 times more on we pons , research and copying than Hussain are..its only logical that in next few years china wouldnt need russia..we are already seeing the signs of this, whether we like to believe it or not..
in next 5-10 years china will be competing with USA in race of technology far ahead from any country


----------



## rcrmj

ptldM3 said:


> Yes they did except it was not very good and it was Japanese. And just because Aviation Week says that there is a &#8216;hint&#8217; that the radar may be comparable to the APG-79 does not mean it is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Chinese guy mocking Russia on importing, that is rich. I bet you were clueless that even the United States imports some weapons/systems from abroad. The point is Russia has access to technology that China can only dream of. Don&#8217;t expect to even touch let alone sniff the Typhoon&#8217;s Virgilus ECM suit or the Thales targeting pod . *And yes China still imports from Russia, so the joke is on you*.


maybe 90% of the so called 'imports from russian' are as fake as those BS russian news like 48 Su-35, rest cable or Su-33 etc, simple fact, China leads russia in most scientific fields now, you either eat it or try to disput with statistics from WB, WIPO or PCT....I wont even be surprised nowadays russia buys lots heavy equipments from China for their factories and data companis, because UK does buying a lot created in China high tech equipments from China now....
so you can laugh at us 'copying' you decade ago, but now only very narrowed area in defence industry only that you can laugh but again it will be over soon

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## antonius123

ptldM3 said:


> A Chinese guy mocking Russia on importing, that is rich. I bet you were clueless that even the United States imports some weapons/systems from abroad. The point is Russia has access to technology that China can only dream of. Don&#8217;t expect to even touch let alone sniff the Typhoon&#8217;s Virgilus ECM suit or the Thales targeting pod . And yes China still imports from Russia, so the joke is on you.



China has r&d capability to develop so called Typhoon's virgilus ECM suit; someday Russia may buy it from china.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## antonius123

21 Dec 2012 said:


>



Have any argument to prove me wrong? or only laugh in missery?


----------



## 21 Dec 2012

antonius123 said:


> Have any argument to prove me wrong? or only laugh in missery?


You cannot make arbitrary claims and and then ask people to prove you wrong.


----------



## antonius123

21 Dec 2012 said:


> You cannot make arbitrary claims and and then ask people to prove you wrong.




Your being clueless doesnt mean other ppl claim is arbitrary 

it has been proven and factual that China has strong capability in R&D; you can find out by googling that china's expenditure budget for R&D now is the second biggest after USA, and they have pool of talents (engineer and scientist)

As the matter of fact China has prove to lead in many area technology such as: Super Computer, Bullet Train, Telecomunications, microchip, including automation technology.

If they could develop stealth J-20, fastest supercomputer, fastest bullet train, robust Nuclear Reactor, powerful microprocessor competing intel/nvidia/etc, why dont they arent capable to do the same for so called "Typhoon's virgilus ECM suit" ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## QSeon

antonius123 said:


> Your being clueless doesnt mean other ppl claim is arbitrary
> 
> it has been proven and factual that China has strong capability in R&D; you can find out by googling that china's expenditure budget for R&D now is the second biggest after USA, and they have pool of talents (engineer and scientist)
> 
> As the matter of fact China has prove to lead in many area technology such as: Super Computer, Bullet Train, Telecomunications, microchip, including automation technology.
> 
> If they could develop stealth J-20, fastest supercomputer, fastest bullet train, robust Nuclear Reactor, powerful microprocessor competing intel/nvidia/etc, why dont they arent capable to do the same for so called "Typhoon's virgilus ECM suit" ?


 
Bro, dont waste your time arguing with him, a lot of russians are so proud of their soviets-era past and cannot accept the rest of the world continuing to ignore them. 

you should say russians have the best technology in every field, it would make them calm and relaxed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## antonius123

QSeon said:


> Bro, dont waste your time arguing with him, a lot of russians are so proud of their soviets-era past and cannot accept the rest of the world continuing to ignore them.
> 
> you should say russians have the best technology in every field, it would make them calm and relaxed.



We cannot let the ignorant keep being ignorant 

China is already ahead of Russia in many or even most field of technology. They need to realize about this reality

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## pzkilo

rcrmj said:


> maybe 90% of the so called 'imports from russian' are as fake as those BS russian news like 48 Su-35, rest cable or Su-33 etc, simple fact, China leads russia in most scientific fields now, you either eat it or try to disput with statistics from WB, WIPO or PCT....I wont even be surprised nowadays russia buys lots heavy equipments from China for their factories and data companis, because UK does buying a lot created in China high tech equipments from China now....
> so you can laugh at us 'copying' you decade ago, but now only very narrowed area in defence industry only that you can laugh but again it will be over soon


 
U can show them this:





it hurts ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Speeder 2

The thread is not aiming at rubbishing Russians, who have achieved a lot in defence technologies, reaseanablely, given the insane level of defence % of GDP and the length of the time of the Cold War they dedicated themselves in. And don´t forget Russia and China are neighbours and strategic allies at many highest levels. 

Yet the fact Russian posters must realise, even after daily fix of Vodka, is that relatively and especially to China, Russia is heavily relying on the their Cold War residual technologies that is depreciating at a fast speed. Hence they should not be surprised, or resist the reality with unfounded arrogance and ignorance sometimes, that China as world´s second largest economy (perhaps already is the largest in real GDP) has now surpassed Russia in numerous high-tech areas which often are of dual-use nature. 

Don&#8217;t think for a second that cohorts such as France, GB or S Korea would be allowed by the US to sell critical tech(especially semicon-related) to Russia without upper cap even though the Cold War was over. So-called licenced EW suite and targeting pod, etc. of the Eurocanards, I suspect, are not too much different from say India&#8217;s licencing of key Western tech, in which the core tech are always NOT available even though TOT rates are as high as 85% or more. 

As an example, Russia as far as I am aware has just been allowed recently to produce 64nm with Intel licence using imported IBM machines, more or less at the same level of China, if we conservatively discount China&#8217;s indigenous and ongoing effort on 40nm machines.

No one can seriously deny that Su -35 is superior to J-11B, especially and particularly given its engine. Yet they are generally in the same technological page.



*That being said, It&#8217;s about time to bust &#8220;Israel high tech superpower&#8221; myth:*

With more than 7 mio people and an average IQ of 92, Israel&#8217;s high IQers ( I assume here as >=135 entry level for Mensa, more or less capable of high tech research ) are about 130,000 under very optimistic normalisation. If we further roughly assume that only 30% of the figure fall into the working age, within which 30% (an *EXTREMELY *optimistic assumption) are directly dedicated in tech-related fields, *we only have 11,000*. 

Deducted further high ranking functionaries and other that not in R&D field, Israel&#8217;s innovation-prone and functioning high tech brains are in their thousands : *8,000 to 10,000 max (in both civilian plus military tech)*, with assumptions as generous as almost unbelievable. Yes, Ashkenazis, allegedly ( for I've never seen ANY biological and genetical basis for that, nor studies done on very large samples to support the claim. Note: arbitragical Nobel Science Prize, or any Prize for a closely held circle judged by a tiny group of people, is far from a strict proxi for population avg IQ especially at this high level)  have slightly higher IQ on average than the Han Chinese. But their impact is insignificant when the total populatuion is tiny.

In sheer contrast, with 1.3 B and an average IQ of 105, China&#8217;s high IQ pool (still>=135 here) is staggering 26 million even without any normalisation after which should be many more - *200X that of Israel*. If 30% of which are within working age, and *ONLY *2% (in contrast to Israel&#8217;s 30%) are in tech field R&D, * still have >160,000*. 

So *China have brains who are at the minimum 16X that of Israel in the right R&D positions capable of making high-tech breakthroughs* , apart from the difference in the dual-used R&D budgets between the two that is at orders of magnitude.

Israel may be within top 10 military tech export nations in $ term, yet any suggestion that a significant portion of that are indigenous Israeli hence Israel is some sort of "smart high tech supwerpower" is absurd as illustrated in the aforementioned general brain power comparison. 

Israel was one of the first in AESA?  Gimme a break! AESA requires not only cutting edge theory, but also chips, machines to make chips, and collaboration of varies other high-caliber industrial achievements on which Israle is not near the top league. Israel being one of the first of ASEA is about in the same sense as Saudis, when they landed their hands on the first batch of US R&D and/or functioning products.

The only explanation to this abnormality ( e.g. China sometimes have interests in "Israeli " tech) we've observed is that *Israel military high tech by and large (overwhelming majority) ARE IN FACT second or third hand hi-tech of USA*, which have been either directly/indirectly gifted/sold at discount to Israel via countless sole/joint R&D programmes across board in decades, or just come from industrial espionages given the numbers of high ranking Israel-US duel citizenship personnel in so many key positions in the US defence industry. 

Get real, with zero USA tech input(say hypothetical US/EU/Japan high tech embargo as we do to China), tech-wise when measured by volumn and general quality, Israel today would have been more or less in the same league of Iran, who has about 5 pts lower avg IQ but 10X bigger by head counts hence theoritically could generate tier-I high IQer as many as, nor even slightly more than, that of Israel.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ptldM3

rcrmj said:


> maybe 90% of the so called 'imports from russian' are as fake as those BS russian news like 48 Su-35, rest cable or Su-33 etc, simple fact, China leads russia in most scientific fields now, you either eat it or try to disput with statistics from WB, WIPO or PCT....I wont even be surprised nowadays russia buys lots heavy equipments from China for their factories and data companis, because UK does buying a lot created in China high tech equipments from China now....
> so you can laugh at us 'copying' you decade ago, but now only very narrowed area in defence industry only that you can laugh but again it will be over soon



Right all those, EW helicopter, transport helicopter, engines, air defence systems, ect have never been delivered right? 



antonius123 said:


> China has r&d capability to develop so called Typhoon's virgilus ECM suit; someday Russia may buy it from china.



This is the dumbest thing i ever heard. The Virgilus is a unique system, even if China has the R&D it does not mean they have the capability or know how to come up with something similar. By your logic China should have the ability to create jet engines--oh wait they still import them.


----------



## antonius123

ptldM3 said:


> By ecosystem do you mean producing electronics for childrens toys? Its also no secret that Chinas leads the world in IT theft, much of what comes out of the Chinese semiconductor industries is ripped off or blatantly stolen from other companies.



How could people with ignorant post like you try to convince other people in technology matters like aerospace? 

Your knowledge about china's products obviously is limited to toys, while you need to learn and find fact that your country import a lot high tech from china.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ptldM3

Speeder 2 said:


> *That being said, It&#8217;s about time to bust &#8220;Israel high tech superpower&#8221; myth:*
> 
> With more than 7 mio people and an average IQ of 92, Israel&#8217;s high IQers ( I assume here as >=135 entry level for Mensa, more or less capable of high tech research ) are about 130,000 under very optimistic normalisation. If we further roughly assume that only 30% of the figure fall into the working age, within which 30% (an *EXTREMELY *optimistic assumption) are directly dedicated in tech-related fields, *we only have 11,000*.
> 
> Deducted further high ranking functionaries and other that not in R&D field, Israel&#8217;s innovation-prone and functioning high tech brains are in their thousands : *8,000 to 10,000 max (in both civilian plus military tech)*, with assumptions as generous as almost unbelievable. Yes, Ashkenazis, allegedly ( for I've never seen ANY biological and genetical basis for that, nor studies done on very large samples to support the claim. Note: arbitragical Nobel Science Prize, or any Prize for a closely held circle judged by a tiny group of people, is far from a strict proxi for population avg IQ especially at this high level)  have slightly higher IQ on average than the Han Chinese. But their impact is insignificant when the total populatuion is tiny.
> 
> In sheer contrast, with 1.3 B and an average IQ of 105, China&#8217;s high IQ pool (still>=135 here) is staggering 26 million even without any normalisation after which should be many more - *200X that of Israel*. If 30% of which are within working age, and *ONLY *2% (in contrast to Israel&#8217;s 30%) are in tech field R&D, * still have >160,000*.
> 
> So *China have brains who are at the minimum 16X that of Israel in the right R&D positions capable of making high-tech breakthroughs* , apart from the difference in the dual-used R&D budgets between the two that is at orders of magnitude.
> 
> Israel may be within top 10 military tech export nations in $ term, yet any suggestion that a significant portion of that are indigenous Israeli hence Israel is some sort of "smart high tech supwerpower" is absurd as illustrated in the aforementioned general brain power comparison.





Busted? The only thing i read was some incoherent rant about IQ. When you have valid points come back and debate but in the mean time stop posting nonsense.



Speeder 2 said:


> *Israel was one of the first in AESA?  Gimme a break!* AESA requires not only cutting edge theory, but also chips, machines to make chips, and collaboration of varies other high-caliber industrial achievements on which Israle is not near the top league. Israel being one of the first of ASEA is about in the same sense as Saudis, when they landed their hands on the first batch of US R&D and/or functioning products.



It&#8217;s called the ELTA Phalcon.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## antonius123

ptldM3 said:


> Right all those, EW helicopter, transport helicopter, engines, air defence systems, ect have never been delivered right?
> 
> 
> 
> This is the dumbest thing i ever heard. The Virgilus is a unique system, even if China has the R&D it does not mean they have the capability or know how to come up with something similar. By your logic China should have the ability to create jet engines--oh wait they still import them.



The dumbest here is you.. 

Nobody said china has already had the capability in virgilius; try to discern other people's sentence properly, or do you have verbal problem?

R&D takes times, that china may not have ability to create engine / virgilus *at this moment* doesnt mean she will certainly fail to reach that capability

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ptldM3

antonius123 said:


> How could people with ignorant post like you try to convince other people in technology matters like aerospace?
> 
> Your knowledge about china's products obviously is limited to toys, while you need to learn and find fact that your country import a lot high tech from china.



The only one ignorant is you. Answer the question, if China has the cabability to produce something similar to the Virgilus than why does China still import engines for the jf-17? By your logic they should easly come up with something on their own because of their 'R&D'.


----------



## ptldM3

antonius123 said:


> The dumbest here is you..
> 
> *Nobody said china has already had the capability in virgilius*; try to discern other people's sentence properly, or do you have verbal problem?
> 
> R&D takes times, that china may not have ability to create engine / virgilus *at this moment* doesnt mean she will certainly fail to reach that capability



You are a liar, this is what you said--and I quote: 



antonius123 said:


> *China has r&d capability to develop so called Typhoon's virgilus *ECM suit; someday Russia may buy it from china.



Now we know you are a liar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## antonius123

ptldM3 said:


> The only one ignorant is you. Answer the question, if China has the cabability to produce something similar to the Virgilus than why does China still import engines for the jf-17? By your logic they should easly come up with something on their own because of their 'R&D'.



My post just above yours has already replying to your typically verbal (reading) comprehension problem 

\/
\/



antonius123 said:


> The dumbest here is you..
> 
> *Nobody said china has already had the capability in virgilius*; try to discern other people's sentence properly, or do you have verbal problem?
> 
> R&D takes times, that china may not have ability to create engine / virgilus *at this moment* doesnt mean she will certainly fail to reach that capability

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## antonius123

ptldM3 said:


> You are a liar, this is what you said--and I quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Now we know you are a liar.



Now it is confirmed that you have a severely verbal problem 

China has R&D capability to develop space station, does it mean that she has already had space station?? do you understand what R&D capability means? 

Cmon..... I dont need to teach language or basic logic here

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ptldM3

antonius123 said:


> My post just above yours has already replying to your typically verbal (reading) comprehension problem
> 
> \/
> \/





The only one with verbal reading problems is you. Not only that but you have been caught lying. That sentence where you quoted yourself was *after you made the original claim*.

This is what you said *originally*:

Post *#44*



antonius123 said:


> *China has the R&D to develop so called Typhoon&#8217;s Virgilus*.





After that you stated:

Post *#55*




antonius123 said:


> *Nobody said China has already had the capability in Virgilus*



It&#8217;s clear as day that you are contradicting yourself, and everyone can see which statement you made first. The problem is not my verbal skills but rather that you are a liar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## antonius123

ptldM3 said:


> The only one with verbal reading problems is you. Not only that but you have been caught lying. That sentence where you quoted yourself was *after you made the original claim*.
> 
> This is what you said *originally*:
> 
> Post *#44*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After that you stated:
> 
> Post *#55*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It&#8217;s clear as day that you are contradicting yourself, and everyone can see which statement you made first. The problem is not my verbal skills but rather that you are a liar.


 
My Post #44 said: China has the *R&D capability to develop* so called Typhoon&#8217;s Virgilus.

My Post #55 said: Nobody said China has already had the *capability in* Virgilus

Do you know the difference? or should I elaborate it to you just the way I elaborate to my little nephew? 

Notice the red bold and discern the difference. Let me know if you still can't find the difference


----------



## ptldM3

antonius123 said:


> My Post #44 said: China has the *R&D to develop* so called Typhoons Virgilus.
> 
> My Post #55 said: Nobody said China has already had the *capability* in Virgilus
> 
> Do you know the difference? or should I elaborate it to you just the way I elaborate to my little nephew?
> 
> Notice the red bold and discern the difference. Let me know if you are unable yet to find the difference



Do you ever actually think before you push the post button? If China has the R&D to develop the Virgilus (which you claimed they did) than what or why do they lack in capability? Key words here are research and development. So if China can come up with an idea which is the *research* part and than have the ability to produce it which is the *development* part than why are they incapable of developing the Virgilus?


----------



## antonius123

ptldM3 said:


> Do you ever actually think before you push the post button?



Put that advice for yourself, coz it is obvious and proven here that you failed many times in understanding basic and simple explanation 



> If China has the R&D to develop the Virgilus (which you claimed they did) than what or why do they lack in capability? Key words here are research and development. So if China can come up with an idea which is the *research* part and than have the ability to produce it which is the *development* part than why are they incapable of developing the Virgilus?



It is very simple.... as I said and you have failed to catch, because *R&D takes time.*
Thats why i said dont be surprised if someday Russia may buy it from china 

PS: I never claimed that currently china has the ability to produce virgilus. Besides your post above is ridiculous. How could nation with r&d capability is incapable of developing? it is logically conflicting. Also - ability to produce is nothing to do with development. See... how many stupidity you have made in your single argument. 

Your intelectual problem seems so pathetic and laughable. 

BTW may I know how you judge that china currently is incapable in virgilus?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ptldM3

antonius123 said:


> Put that advice for yourself, coz it is obvious and proven here that you failed many times in understanding basic and simple explanation




The only one failing to understand or coherently express themselves is you.





antonius123 said:


> It is very simple.... as I said and you have failed to catch, because *R&D takes time.*
> Thats why i said dont be surprised if someday Russia may buy it from china




Its too late to change what you have said, originally you stated that China has the capability to develop the Virgilus. You signifying that perhaps Russia may purchase the Virgilous from China can be interpreted in many ways, such as China has a Virgilous type system but is not ready to sell, or that Russia is not ready to buy. Your vague English is pitiful at best and more abstract that a maze.




antonius123 said:


> PS: I never claimed that currently china has the ability to produce virgilus. Besides your post above is ridiculous. How could nation with r&d capability is incapable of developing? it is logically conflicting. Also - ability to produce is nothing to do with development. See... how many stupidity you have made in your single argument.




This is why you are slow, I specifically and explicitly said that if China has the research and development that they should be able to produce a similar system, or to be fair any ECM system--your claim was that they do have the research and development but do not have the capability. So who here has the reading comprehension problem?




antonius123 said:


> Your intelectual problem seems so pathetic and laughable.




You spelled intelectual wrong, it is spelled intellectual 





antonius123 said:


> BTW may I know how you judge that china currently is incapable in virgilus?



I never said they can not, I stated that it may be possible to produce a similar system. The Virgilous is unique, it would be nearly impossible for China or anyone, for that matter, to produce the same system with the same capabilities--the key is that a number of different companies from different nations produce ECMs but not all are equal. My original rebuttal questioned your assertion that China has the Research and development to produce the Virgilous by pointing out Chinas engine difficulties despite their research and development.

Its more of a philosophical approach.


----------



## antonius123

double post


----------



## antonius123

ptldM3 said:


> The only one failing to understand or coherently express themselves is you.


I stated very clearly about: "R&D Capability" and "capability in", those two are blatantly different.
Your failure to comprehend the meaning and difference between those 2 is not my failure but your problem with verbal comprehension 




> It&#8217;s too late to change what you have said, originally you stated that China has the capability to develop the Virgilus. You signifying that perhaps Russia may purchase the Virgilous from China can be interpreted in many ways, such as China has a Virgilous type system but is not ready to sell, or that Russia is not ready to buy. Your vague English is pitiful at best and more abstract that a maze.


China indeed has capability in r&d for the virgilus, but it doesnt mean that currently china has ability to produce that. My arguments are consistent.

Rusia "may" purchase... notice word "may"... do you know the meaning? If you ridiculously interpret as the certainty that rusia will purchase from china - moreover you interpret that China certainly has a virgilous, then it is you that moronic. 

Thats what I said: you have verbal problem 



> This is why you are slow, I specifically and explicitly said that if China has the research and development that they should be able to produce a similar system, or to be fair any ECM system--your claim was that they do have the research and development but do not have the &#8216;capability&#8216;. So who here has the reading comprehension problem?



Obviously you dont understand what r&d, and what production is.
I have explained above that r&d capability and production capability are 2 different thing. You could merely produce even without r&d.

I have explained you that R&D takes time; china has R&D capability to develop good engine (WS15), but of course the r&d is still in process and WS15 has not yet come to production. The same case could happen with virgilous.

It is obvious you failed to understand and respond my argument properly. It is you that are very slow to understand other people's argument. 



> You spelled &#8216;intelectual&#8217; wrong, it is spelled intellectual


Now you try to dispute my typo error to save your face? 

typo error is trivia, but failure to understand basic logic is pathetic idiocy 




> I never said they can not,


 
You said u never said so??

this is your own post:



ptldM3 said:


> than have the ability to produce it which is the *development* part than why are they *incapable* of developing the Virgilus?



Now who is the liar? 



> I stated that it may be possible to produce a similar system. The Virgilous is unique, *it would be nearly impossible for China or anyone, for that matter*, to produce the same system with the same capabilities--the key is that a number of different companies from different nations produce ECM&#8216;s but not all are equal. My original rebuttal questioned your assertion that China has the Research and development to produce the Virgilous by pointing out China&#8217;s engine difficulties despite their research and development.
> 
> It&#8217;s more of a philosophical approach.



Why is it nearly impossible for china or anyone to produce virgilus with the same capabilities?

China has proven her ability to produce the fastest bullet train, the fastest super computer, more robust nuclear reactor, etc, then why you said it will be different case with ECM?

Difficulties faced during the r&d process is something normal, including in engine r&d; do you think china has never found difficulties during the development of her fastest bullet train or fastest supercomputer etc? China has ability to produce WS-10, and its only a matter of time for china to be able to produce WS15 (or even she has already had the capability to produce WS15? we dont know yet)

Your post seems more like myth than reasonable argument 
Btw this is my long argument for you, I am afraid with your verbal problem you would fail to catch my point


----------



## artaxerces

This thread is becoming a pointless flag waving contest....

China and Russia are STRATEGIC PARTNERS. What does it matter if Russia is better than China is some military technical fields and not as good in others?!?


----------



## rcrmj

artaxerces said:


> This thread is becoming a pointless flag waving contest....
> 
> China and Russia are STRATEGIC PARTNERS. What does it matter if Russia is better than China is some military technical fields and not as good in others?!?


two things make this thread pointless
1. obviously Indians well displayed inferior complexity
2. some russian memebers mind still living in mighty soviet era

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ptldM3

antonius123 said:


> I stated very clearly about: "R&D Capability" and "capability in", those two are blatantly different.
> Your failure to comprehend the meaning and difference between those 2 is not my failure but your problem with verbal comprehension




You stated incoherent and vague nonsense that came to contradict itself. Take some basic English.





antonius123 said:


> The red bold : I never said that; you failed to prove, show us when I said that.




You are a spectacular liar, here it is word for word:




antonius123 said:


> China has r&d capability to develop so called Typhoon's virgilus ECM suit; someday Russia may buy it from china.







antonius123 said:


> Rusia "may" purchase... notice word "may"... do you know the meaning? If you ridiculously interpret as the certainty that rusia will purchase from china - moreover you interpret that China certainly has a virgilous, then it is you that moronic.


 

The only thing that is &#8216;moronic&#8217; is your debating skills or lack there of and your grammar/sentence structure. The entire argument of you sarcastically suggesting that Russia may purchase a Chinese equivalent to the Virgilous is, by itself a manifestation of your vague one-liners that can be interpreted in anyway, shape or form. 

You stating that someday Russia may buy from China does not tell us anything about future or present, instead it is a meaningless one liner that can be interpreted in many ways.





antonius123 said:


> Thats what I said: you have verbal problem




No you just have piss poor grammar and the reading comprehension of a door nail.





antonius123 said:


> Obviously you dont understand what r&d, and what production is.
> I have explained above that r&d capability and production capability are 2 different thing. You could merely produce even without r&d.





You have stated many ridiculous thing but this one takes the cake, How do you intend to produce a self defense suit if you do not intend to conduct research and development? 





antonius123 said:


> I have explained you that R&D takes time; china has R&D capability to develop good engine (WS15), but of course the r&d is still in process and WS15 has not yet come to production. The same case could happen with virgilous.
> 
> It is obvious you failed to understand and respond my argument properly. It is you that are very slow to understand other people's argument.



\
I understand the process of research and development better than you. You stating that China can produce the Virgilous and than retracting your original claim when your arguments contradicted each other just shows that that you are either a fraud or you can not properly express yourself through the English language which you have proven.





antonius123 said:


> Now you try to dispute my typo error to save your face?




The only one that was trying to save face was you, it was you claiming that I had the &#8220;intelectual&#8221; problem but the joke backfired on you since you could not even spell intellectual.  










antonius123 said:


> You said u never said so??
> 
> this is your own post:




Further proof you can&#8217;t read and you are a manipulative liar, in that sentence I clearly asked you why China was incapable of producing the Virgilous if they had the capability of research and development. Get it, or do I need to spoon feed you and put you in a high chair? 





antonius123 said:


> Now who is the liar?





You are, and you clearly can&#8217;t read.





antonius123 said:


> Why is it nearly impossible for china or anyone to produce virgilus with the same capabilities?






The Virgilous used AESA modules. A better comparison would be AESA radars. Do you believe that just because you have 2 AESA radars that they have the same capability? Even if they have the identical TR module count? Two very similar radars both X bands, both with similar antenna, both with similar TR modules counts can be drastically different. Different channels. Drastically different frequency hopping, different power apertures, and different resolutions both in air mode and ground mapping. Further, can one radar even operate in dual modes or is it limited to performing a2a, a2g and a2 sea modes individually? What about the TR modules? As stated even if both radar have the same TR module count it does not mean that both radars will actively use the same amount of TR modules when both radars are operating. For example, cooling methods will determine how many TR modules are active at one time and how many have to be switched off due to overheating. 

This is just the basics I can keep going on and on but it is quite clear that two systems whether they are radars or defense suits can be very different even if from the outside they seem very similar.


----------



## ptldM3

rcrmj said:


> two things make this thread pointless
> 1. obviously Indians well displayed inferior complexity
> 2. *some russian memebers mind still living in mighty soviet era*



This just tells me that you havn't even been reading the thread, most of what i said does not have anything to do with Russia.


----------



## antonius123

ptldM3 said:


> You stated incoherent and vague nonsense that came to contradict itself. Take some basic English.


Anybody else here understand easily the difference between r&d capability and capability in producing.



> You are a spectacular liar, here it is word for word


Indeed I said that china has r&d capability to develop Typhoon's virgilus ECM.

Cmon.... time to time you keep demonstrate idiocy and verbal problem 




> The only thing that is &#8216;moronic&#8217; is your debating skills or lack there of and your grammar/sentence structure. The entire argument of you sarcastically suggesting that Russia may purchase a Chinese equivalent to the Virgilous is, by itself a manifestation of your vague one-liners that can be interpreted in anyway, shape or form.
> 
> You stating that someday Russia may buy from China does not tell us anything about future or present, instead it is a meaningless one liner that can be interpreted in many ways.


It is your idiotic interpretation; dont blame on other ppl sentence which is already glaring.

If you dont understant other ppl argument, ask! dont use your own assumption.

My sentence is telling us anythng about future or present... that is china has capability to develop it!

Remember, you have demonstrated your verbal problem many times here.




> No you just have piss poor grammar and the reading comprehension of a door nail.


OK, now tell me which poor grammar of mine that u use as an excuse for your failure to understand my argument? 




> You have stated many ridiculous thing but this one takes the cake, How do you intend to produce a self defense suit if you do not intend to conduct research and development?


Which ridiculous things that I have made?
Do you realize that you have demonstrated poor grammar? 

OK, now prove us your claim that china has no intention to conduct research and development in that matter! i am waiting here 





> I understand the process of research and development better than you. You stating that China can produce the Virgilous and than retracting your original claim when your arguments contradicted each other just shows that that you are either a fraud or you can not properly express yourself through the English language which you have proven.


When did I said that china currently could produce virgilous?? 
Again you're demonstrating your pathetic verbal problem and poor reading comprehension..





> The only one that was trying to save face was you, it was you claiming that I had the &#8220;intelectual&#8221; problem but the joke backfired on you since you could not even spell intellectual.


Which one?
So far you only create blunder by blunder 




> Further proof you can&#8217;t read and you are a manipulative liar, in that sentence I clearly asked you why China was incapable of producing the Virgilous if they had the capability of research and development. Get it, or do I need to spoon feed you and put you in a high chair?


Again you are making inconsistent argument.

Do you forget your own claim above that u never said china is incapable of producing virgilous? then why now you said china was incapable?? you are inconsistent 

Then how do you know that China is not capable of producing the virgilous?

Also how many times should I explain that producing capability is not the same as r&d capability? which part of my sentence that you can't understand? 

You are making a lot of blunder only in one argument.




> You are, and you clear can&#8217;t read.


Not proven yet. 
On the other way around, your inconsistency has proved you are the liar 




> The Virgilous used AESA modules. A better comparison would be AESA radars. Do you believe that just because you have 2 AESA radars that they have the same capability? Even if they have the identical TR module count? Two very similar radars both X bands, both with similar antenna, both with similar TR modules counts can be drastically different. Different channels. Drastically different frequency hopping, different power apertures, and different resolutions both in air mode and ground mapping. Further, can one radar even operate in dual modes or is it limited to performing a2a, a2g and a2 sea modes individually? What about the TR modules? As stated even if both radar have the same TR module count it does not mean that both radars will actively use the same amount of TR modules when both radars are operating. For example, cooling methods will determine how many TR modules are active at one time and how many have to be switched off due to overheating.
> 
> This is just the basics I can keep going on and on but it is quite clear that two systems whether they are radars or defense suits can be very different even if from the outside they seem very similar.


 
Your argument doesnt explain yet why it is nearly imposible for china in making virgilous with the same capabilities. 

Your argument only demonstrate that you have ur own *BELIEF* that Typhoon virgilous is a super duper tech that impossible for china to reach even in the near future.

It proves rcms claim that you are still living in the past mighty sovyet era. That time is over! current china is not the same with past china in sovyet era. You should change your obsolete mentality.

My argument is easily proven, remember you have demonstrate your ignorance by stating china could only make toys?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## antonius123

ptldM3 said:


> This just tells me that you havn't even been reading the thread, most of what i said does not have anything to do with Russia.



But you are imagining china in sovyet era that could only produce toys

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rcrmj

ptldM3 said:


> This just tells me that you havn't even been reading the thread, most of what i said does not have anything to do with Russia.


with all the fake russian news from last few month you cant blame me to believe that most russians are still living in Soviet era..especially your stupid comment of what can China does is 'copy' from Russia makes you more like a jealous ranting clown..have you ever studied the current landscape of Patent and R&D from professional international institutions? i guess no

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ptldM3

antonius123 said:


> Anybody else here understand easily the difference between r&d capability and capability in producing.
> 
> You clearly do not.






antonius123 said:


> Indeed I said that china has r&d capability to develop Typhoon's virgilus ECM.
> 
> Cmon.... time to time you keep demonstrate idiocy and verbal problem




Yet you contradicted yourself again, and again. Taking some basic English classes could only benefit you. If you were trying to imply that China has the means to develop the Virgilous but has not yet done so you could have said it the way I just said it. There is a big difference between your spelling and mine, and that is your spelling is vague and simply unacceptable.





antonius123 said:


> It is your idiotic interpretation; dont blame on other ppl sentence which is already glaring.




^^ Look at the above sentence, how can I not blame you? It is a catastrophe and an abomination to the English language. Don&#8217;t is a compound word and needs to be treated as such, the word on, is simply out of place, &#8220;ppl&#8217; isn&#8217;t even a word and everything after &#8220;ppl&#8221; does not make any sense.





antonius123 said:


> If you dont understant other ppl argument, ask! dont use your own assumption.




Or you could do everyone the favor of writing a coherent sentence, how does that sound?







antonius123 said:


> My sentence is telling us anythng about future or present... that is china has capability to develop it!





Again you make no sense, by anything, I can only assume that you mean everything. And you saying China has the capability does not make it so.








antonius123 said:


> OK, now tell me which poor grammar of mine that u use as an excuse for your failure to understand my argument?





I gave you plenty of examples, even in this very post.





antonius123 said:


> Which ridiculous things that I have made?
> Do you realize that you have demonstrated poor grammar?




You have made the ridiculous claim that China, &#8220;can merely produce even without R&D&#8221;. I would love an explanation to that.







antonius123 said:


> OK, now prove us your claim that china has no intention to conduct research and development in that matter! i am waiting here





Wow, really? Are you that slow? I never stated that China does not intend to conduct research and development I asked you how China is able to produce defensive suits if they do not plan on spending time on &#8216;r&d&#8217;. Remember it was *you* that stated that a product can be produced without research and development.






antonius123 said:


> When did I said that china currently can produce virgilous??






I only quoted you a half dozen times on it.






antonius123 said:


> Again you're demonstrating your pathetic verbal problem and poor reading comprehension..





After a public spanking over the internet you, of all people, have the audacity to question my verbal skills and reading comprehension? I aced English reading and writing in college. You would be lucky to pass an ESL class.






antonius123 said:


> Again you are making inconsistent argument.
> 
> Do you forget your own claim above that u never said china is incapable of producing virgilous? then why now you said china was incapable?? you are inconsistent
> 
> Then how do you know that China is not capable of producing the virgilous?




China is not capable of produce the Vergilous, as I stated it is unique and would be very difficult if not impossible to replicate it and not just for China. The Virgilous is an ECM, China can produce ECM&#8217;s, just not a Virgilous. You understand? Are will you try twist my sentence around again?







antonius123 said:


> Also how many times should I explain that producing capability is not the same as r&d capability? which part of my sentence that you can't understand?
> 
> You are making a lot of blunder only in one argument.




Don&#8217;t lecture me on research and development and producing a system. It is not possible to produce anything without research and development unless someone transfers the technology and know how.





antonius123 said:


> Not proven yet.






Yes, it is very much proven. You are a liar.






antonius123 said:


> Your argument doesnt explain yet why it is nearly imposible for china in making virgilous with the same capabilities.



My argument clearly explained why it would be nearly impossible for anyone to replicate something to have identical capabilities and performance. There was even an engineer on this forum that had worked with military equipment that claimed it would be very difficult to copy something to exact specification. If it is difficult to copy something than how do you plan to copy or replicate the performance of a system that you do not posses? And as stated earlier even if two systems look very similar and on paper have similar performance it does not mean they will perform similarly. Again lets take radars for an example, lets say we have two x band radars with 1,500 TR modules. One may think that they are similar in performance because they have identical specifications yet one may change frequencies at a much greater rate, while the other may have overheating issues and be forced to run on a fraction of the available TR modules.


----------



## peaceful

Typhoon Virgilius? And you believe China doesn't have the capacity to build a comparable system?


----------



## antonius123

ptldM3 said:


> Yet you contradicted yourself again, and again. Taking some basic English classes could only benefit you. If you were trying to imply that China has the means to develop the Virgilous but has not yet done so you could have said it the way I just said it. There is a big difference between your spelling and mine, and that is your spelling is vague and simply unacceptable.



Which one I contradict myself?
I have shown you your idiocy and verbal problem that make u could not distinguish "r&d capability" and "capability in production"

In what part of my explanation that u dont understand?

And again I ask you: which spelling or grammatical mistake that make u not understand my explanation?




> ^^ Look at the above sentence, how can I not blame you? It is a catastrophe and an abomination to the English language. Dont is a compound word and needs to be treated as such, the word on, is simply out of place, ppl isnt even a word and everything after ppl does not make any sense.




Oh really??? is it really catastrophe? *or it is your english and poor comprehension problem*?  cmon.. dont make this up.

You only dispute trivial things but fail in basic logic and simple reading comprehension.
This is not writing competition nor thesis writing. This is forum for informal discussion!
Therefore I don't need to bother to write according to grammar perfectly.

Now*tell me which catastrophe that Ive made that make you difficult to comprehend my argumen*? U could not keep blaming trivial things for your failure to understand.

Talking about grammar, you have made many mistakes, but I dont want to bother to show them to you because it is not point of my arguments; despite ur grammatical mistake I still have logic and comprehension capability to understand ur writing.

U should be shamed with ur excuse, coz it only demonstrates ur handicap in basic comprehension.




> Or you could do everyone the favor of writing a coherent sentence, how does that sound?


I write: china has "r&d capability" to develop virgilius.

Now show me which mistaken grammar/sentence that I've made that cause you to think that r&d capability = production capability! 

Pathetic excuse 




> Again you make no sense, by anything, I can only assume that you mean everything. And you saying China has the capability does not make it so.


Ur excuse is funny.... u sound like robot 





> I gave you plenty of examples, even in this very post.


Above examples??
Those only indicates ur idiocy.

I wrote: r&d capability, but u catch as production capability, then u blame on my grammar? 
Noo... it is ur poor verbal capability, not my grammatical mistake





> You have made the ridiculous claim that China, can merely produce even without R&D. I would love an explanation to that.


Yes china could produce without doing r&d, and it is not only china but other country could do the same.
That's why many US company do r&d in silicon valey and give their design to china for production.

I wonder if u are from engineering background?

I give u one example:
Do u know Foxconn produce Ipad 2 tablet for Apple?
Ipad 2 is not the result of Foxconn r&d, but Apple's r&d, however Apple doesnt produce Ipad at all. Apple give their design to foxconn for production.

It is surprising to know U have no clue about that 




> Wow, really? Are you that slow? I never stated that China does not intend to conduct research and development I asked you how China is able to produce defensive suits if they do not plan on spending time on r&d. Remember it was *you* that stated that a product can be produced without research and development.



I dont say that china could produce virgilius without r&d. *I said r&d capability was not the same as production capability, because u were mixing both*; 

Of course for the virgilius case China need r&d to develop virgilius before she will be able to produce it, because nobody will give their r&d result to china. 

It is u that is being slow to understand here, bcs u always failed to understand 




> I only quoted you a half dozen times on it.


No.. u misunderstood as always




> After a public spanking over the internet you, of all people, have the audacity to question my verbal skills and reading comprehension? I aced English reading and writing in college. You would be lucky to pass an ESL class.


I doubt ur claim.
U always demonstrate your handicap in understanding ppl's (people's) argument. :p

U may have good grammar, but verbal capability require some logic and iq.





> China is not capable of produce the Vergilous, as I stated it is unique and would be very difficult if not impossible to replicate it and not just for China. The Virgilous is an ECM, China can produce ECMs, just not a Virgilous. You understand? Are will you try twist my sentence around again?


Besides inconsistency, ur explanation is not making sense at all.

Why the Typhoon Virgilous is so unique that science & technology superpower like China or USA cannot develop? it is ridiculous.

There is no rule in this universe that the "uniqueness of a technology" would prevent a country especially country like china or usa with strong r&d capability to develop it.

Cmon... this is not myth forum 

China's capability to develop the fastest bullet train and fastest supercomputer has proved that the there is no uniqueness in technology that other country cannot reach, then automatically debunk ur ridiculous myth




> Dont lecture me on research and development and producing a system. It is not possible to produce anything without research and development unless someone transfers the technology and know how.


I said: r&d capability is not the same as production capability.

Because u said china should be able to produce virgilius if china has r&d capability to develop virgilius, which is wrong; and ur mistake indicates u dont understand the meaning of the phrase "r&d capability"




> Yes, it is very much proven. You are a liar.


Nope. u only prove ur failure to comprehend other ppl's argument



> My argument clearly explained why it would be nearly impossible for anyone to replicate something to have identical capabilities and performance. There was even an engineer on this forum that had worked with military equipment that claimed it would be very difficult to copy something to exact specification. If it is difficult to copy something than how do you plan to copy or replicate the performance of a system that you do not posses? And as stated earlier even if two systems look very similar and on paper have similar performance it does not mean they will perform similarly. Again lets take radars for an example, lets say we have two x band radars with 1,500 TR modules. One may think that they are similar in performance because they have identical specifications yet one may change frequencies at a much greater rate, while the other may have overheating issues and be forced to run on a fraction of the available TR modules.


 
Again u are demonstrating ur comprehension problem.
I never said china will 100% copy virgilius, I said: "china has r&d capability to develop it!"

Why it is so difficult for you to understand simple sentence? 
maybe they are not identical in specification, but could have the same or even better performance.

I have shown u about how china develop the fastest bullet train and the fastest supercomputer to you many times, remember?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## antonius123

peaceful said:


> Typhoon Virgilius? And you believe China doesn't have the capacity to build a comparable system?


 
That guy cannot distinguish his own BELIEF (myth) and FACT

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ao333

Why are you guys debating with an Asian-Russian? His opinions does not reflect those of white Russia. He is descriminated in Russia.

It is like debating with a Vietnamese/Indian-American. They will hate you no matter what; and they're not Americans.


----------



## ptldM3

antonius123 said:


> Which one I contradict myself?
> I have shown you your idiocy and verbal problem that make u could not distinguish "r&d capability" and "capability in production"
> 
> In what part of my explanation that u dont understand?
> 
> And again I ask you: which spelling or grammatical mistake that make u not understand my explanation?




Once again you keep ranting on about verbal problems but you still can not compile a half coherent sentence. It was also you that claimed that it is possible to produce something without research and development which is possibly one of the stupidest things I have heard thus far. For example, you need research and development to produce a simple cup. You will need to know the dimensions, the geometry, and what type of material it will be made from (foam, plastic, ect,). 







antonius123 said:


> Oh really??? is it really catastrophe? *or it is your english and poor comprehension problem*?  cmon.. dont make this up.




Yes your English is a catastrophe. My English is fine, in fact I was an English tutor. And I don&#8217;t make things up, your sentences have no flow, poor punctuation, you misspell words, and in general your English is very poor, with poor word choices that render your sentences confusing and incoherent. In any kind of higher level English college writing class you would fail. And I&#8217;m not saying my English is perfect, but for a forum it is exceptional.








antonius123 said:


> Talking about grammar, you have made many mistakes, but I dont want to bother to show them to you because it is not point of my arguments; despite ur grammatical mistake I still have logic and comprehension capability to understand ur writing.







Really? Point those mistakes out. Any mistakes I have possible made have been few and rare. You, on the other hand, keep embarrassing yourself with your writing skills, despite the fact that it was you that brought up the &#8220;verbal&#8221; debate and told me I had the &#8220;intelectual&#8221; problems, so really it was you that started it. You just so happen to be out of your league.


Another one of your problems is that you can not stay focused on a particular subject and instead try to divert attention from your failed arguments by ranting, crying and bitching about anything and everything.







antonius123 said:


> I write: china has "r&d capability" to develop virgilius.
> 
> Now show me which mistaken grammar/sentence that I've made that cause you to think that r&d capability = production capability!
> 
> Pathetic excuse






As I said I have quoted you multiple times, in your quotes you claimed China has the capability to produce the Virgilous and then you retracted your claim based on the fact that you said China may sell their Virgilous to Russia one day, which you than interpreted it as, China does not yet have the capability to produce the Virgilous. As I stated before your language is vague and can be interpreted in many ways.





antonius123 said:


> Ur excuse is funny.... u sound like robot






No I just pointed out one of your many grammatical mistakes that made no sense, so how can you blame me for having a reading comprehension when you are the one that is not making any sense. Reading your posts is sometimes like an puzzle or enigma, you make no sense. 








antonius123 said:


> Yes china could produce without doing r&d, and it is not only china but other country could do the same.
> That's why many US company do r&d in silicon valey and give their design to china for production.
> 
> I wonder if u are from engineering background?
> 
> I give u one example:
> Do u know Foxconn produce Ipad 2 tablet for Apple?
> Ipad 2 is not the result of Foxconn r&d, but Apple's r&d, however Apple doesnt produce Ipad at all. Apple give their design to foxconn for production.
> 
> It is surprising to know U have no clue about that






More proof you&#8217;re slow, I clearly stated that certain things can be produced under license or technology transfer, but we are not talking about technology transfer, we are talking about ECM&#8217;s, more specifically the Virgilous, which no one will give to China to copy. Get it? 







antonius123 said:


> I dont say that china could produce virgilius without r&d. *I said r&d capability was not the same as production capability, because u were mixing both*;








Once again you used vague language which you conveniently than interpret in any way you chose. You clearly stated China can produce items without research and development , but nowhere did you imply it was technology transfer, nor did you mention anything specifically. Sometime I wonder if I&#8217;m arguing with a 12 year old.










antonius123 said:


> Besides inconsistency, ur explanation is not making sense at all.
> 
> Why the Typhoon Virgilous is so unique that science & technology superpower like China or USA cannot develop? it is ridiculous.
> 
> There is no rule in this universe that the "uniqueness of a technology" would prevent a country especially country like china or usa with strong r&d capability to develop it.




How does my explanation not make sense? As I explained even radars with the same TR module count have radically different performance. And if you do not except my explanation of TR modules than you can not argue about turbofan engines. Chinese engines still lack in MTBO&#8217;s, service life and T/W ratio even though China has had access to foreign engines. If China can not make anything even remotely close to the F-135 turbo fan than why do you think it would be easy to make a Virgilous? 













antonius123 said:


> Again u are demonstrating ur comprehension problem.
> I never said china will 100% copy virgilius, I said: "china has r&d capability to develop it!"





That is impossible, how can you develop a Virgilous system if it will not be 100% similar. I can see you hardly know what the Virgilous is. It is an internal ECM system, so perhaps China can develop an internal ECM but it will not be a Vergilous since that is a unique system and no one is going to give it to China for study purposes.





ao333 said:


> Why are you guys debating with an Asian-Russian? His opinions does not reflect those of white Russia. He is descriminated in Russia.
> 
> It is like debating with a Vietnamese/Indian-American. They will hate you no matter what; and they're not Americans.




I&#8217;m Asian? Wow, even I did not know that, last time I looked in the mirror I looked pretty white. Did you happen to extract my DNA?


----------



## antonius123

ptldM3 said:


> Once again you keep ranting on about verbal problems but you still can not compile a half coherent sentence. It was also you that claimed that it is possible to produce something without research and development which is possibly one of the stupidest things I have heard thus far. For example, you need research and development to produce a simple cup. You will need to know the dimensions, the geometry, and what type of material it will be made from (foam, plastic, ect,).


You still keep ranting on my grammar as your excuse for your incapability in comprehension, it is shameful excuse and demonstrating your low Intellectual capability.

I never said r&d is not required at all for production, I said: we can produce without doing r&d (as r&d could be done by other party/country). Again u with ur verbal problem can't distinguish and understand the difference.

I have given u explanation and example of foxconn produce Ipad without their own r&d, which obviously you fail to understand as usual

I said we could produce without doing r&d to show you that r&d and production is 2 different things, which obviously it is still difficult for you to comprehend.




> Yes your English is a catastrophe. My English is fine, in fact I was an English tutor. And I don&#8217;t make things up, your sentences have no flow, poor punctuation, you misspell words, and in general your English is very poor, with poor word choices that render your sentences confusing and incoherent. In any kind of higher level English college writing class you would fail. And I&#8217;m not saying my English is perfect, but for a forum it is exceptional.


Stop ranting on my grammar, coz it is not acceptable excuse for your failure to understand my simple and clear arguments that I have repeated many times.

U are an English tutor?? hm.. maybe.... but * it is explaining why u seem not to have strong industrial engineering background in your arguments, as u could not distinguish r&d and production*. Still.. ur English writing is also far from perfect though your effort, while I indeed do not effort to do so 




> Really? Point those mistakes out. Any mistakes I have possible made have been few and rare. You, on the other hand, keep embarrassing yourself with your writing skills, despite the fact that it was you that brought up the &#8220;verbal&#8221; debate and told me I had the &#8220;intellectual&#8221; problems, so really it was you that started it. You just so happen to be out of your league.


I dont want to be out of topic by discussing your grammar mistake found in your writing here, as it will distract you farther from understanding my simple and logical point.

Of course it is rare, because u put effort to do so, while I do not effort to write according to perfect grammar. As u see.. i use "u", "ppl", "coz" which is not justified in grammar, but acceptable in informal discussion.




> Another one of your problems is that you can not stay focused on a particular subject and instead try to divert attention from your failed arguments by ranting, crying and bitching about anything and everything.


Nope....

I keep focusing on my argument : 

that China has r&d capability to develop virgilous.
r&d capability is not the same as production capability that you mixed up

As the matter of fact, u still failed to comprehend my point beside you don't understand about r&d capability and the difference with production capability.

I told you about your verbal problem and sort of, because you keep failing to catch that simple point.




> As I said I have quoted you multiple times, in your quotes you claimed *China has the capability to produce the Virgilous and then you retracted your claim *based on the fact that you said China may sell their Virgilous to Russia one day, which you than interpreted it as, China does not yet have the capability to produce the Virgilous. As I stated before your language is vague and can be interpreted in many ways.


This is the blatant idiocy of yours.

You said many times so, but I have responded you many times by asking: when I claimed china had capability to produce the virgilous, and many times you keep failing to prove. Shame on u 

*Ur terrible misunderstanding is because you don't have right concept of r&d and production*, therefore u cannot distinguish both of them. See... i have many times challenge you in this topic but again and again not only u fail to respond properly, but u also fail to comprehend my simple point. don't blame on me if i critic your IQ.

You cant keep repeating your argument that I have repeatedly responded (and brake) many times, it is not an intellectual discussion at all and more demonstrate ur intellectual problem, u should answer and respond my argument properly and logically.




> More proof you&#8217;re slow, I clearly stated that certain things can be produced under license or technology transfer, but we are not talking about technology transfer, we are talking about ECM&#8217;s, more specifically the Virgilous, which no one will give to China to copy. Get it?


But you don't understand when I said: we could produce without our own r&d LOL 

It prove that it is you that very slow. 

Now I ask you: do u understand now the difference between r&d capability and production capability?




> Once again you used vague language which you conveniently than interpret in any way you chose. You clearly stated China can produce items without research and development , but nowhere did you imply it was technology transfer, nor did you mention anything specifically. Sometime I wonder if I&#8217;m arguing with a 12 year old.


Again... if u don't understand or not clear, ask!

I am not responsible with your intellectual capability to catch my point.

U should understand other ppl argument' context, they may not stated the context clearly in a long sentence like in textbook or communication letter, but u could ask! that's why it is called: *"DISCUSSION"*.

If you are smart enough and not narrow minded, you should be able to see that possibility (of product design transfer) in my arguments which you obviously failed to see.

As a matter of fact, the way you see other people's argument and the way you discuss make me curious if you are about 12 year old 




> How does my explanation not make sense? As I explained even radars with the same TR module count have radically different performance. And if you do not except my explanation of TR modules than you can not argue about turbofan engines. Chinese engines still lack in MTBO&#8217;s, service life and T/W ratio even though China has had access to foreign engines. If China can not make anything even remotely close to the F-135 turbo fan than why do you think it would be easy to make a Virgilous?



Again you demonstrate your incapability in reading comprehension.

I did not argue about your technical explanation, instead I am arguing the logic behind ur arguments 

I do not deny that chinese engine lack in MTBO's, service life etc, as I do not deny the possibility that china is not able to produce virgilous.

But as I told you in the beginning and repeated many times : china may not have capability to produce powerful engine/virgilous at the moment, but she has r&d capability to develop the powerful engine or virgilous, and you may see china release powerful engine/virgilous in the near future.

I have explained u many times about the difference between r&d capability and production capability, so if you keep mixing it up without ability to counter my explanation about the difference of them, then u are demonstrating idiocy farther.




> That is impossible, how can you develop a Virgilous system if it will not be 100% similar. I can see you hardly know what the Virgilous is. It is an internal ECM system, so perhaps China can develop an internal ECM but it will not be a Vergilous since that is a unique system and no one is going to give it to China for study purposes.


It is only a matter of "name".

China may someday soon produce so called "virginity" with performance equal or even exceed typhoon virgilous. 

There is nothing impossible for that, as i said China has strong r&d capability.

Have I explained you about fastest bullet train that china develop?? It is not similar to those of germany nor japan, but it has equal or even better performance in many areas.

The same case also with micro processor "Loongson"; it is not 100% similar to intel, but it has performance about equal.

So, don't be narrow minded by saying that china could not produce the same thing with the same purpose and same performance without having 100% similar system. its very laughable especially for those who claim themselves as engineer/having technical background

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## revu

antonius123 said:


> Oh really??? is it really catastrophe? *or it is your english and poor comprehension problem*?  cmon.. dont make this up.
> 
> *verbal capability* require some logic and iq.


 
With this verbal thing, i now know who you are.

Welcome back to PDF IJKT bro....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ptldM3

antonius123 said:


> You still keep ranting on my grammar as your excuse for your incapability in comprehension, it is shameful excuse and demonstrating your low Intellectual capability.
> 
> I never said r&d is not required at all for production, I said: we can produce without doing r&d (as r&d could be done by other party/country). Again u with ur verbal problem can't distinguish and understand the difference.
> 
> *I have given u explanation and example of foxconn produce Ipad without their own r&d, which obviously you fail to understand as usual*
> 
> I said we could produce without doing r&d to show you that r&d and production is 2 different things, which obviously it is still difficult for you to comprehend.




You clearly dont read anything I post and then look like a fool on a public forum, I posted this in post #77:







ptldM3 said:


> Dont lecture me on research and development and producing a system. It is not possible to produce anything without research and development *unless someone transfers the technology and know how*.




Not only have we established that you can not compile a coherent sentence but that you also can not read. Do you see that part that i highlighted about technology transfer? Or can you not read? The fact that you even mentioned producing something under license shows that you are running out of arguments. The argument here is producing an ECM suit, obviously no one will let China copy their designs, so what is the point of your rant? Clearly you have none. All of your arguments are rants that try to deviate from the real matter, heck you even mock my near perfect grammar while you have the writing skills of a 6 year old.


----------



## antonius123

ptldM3 said:


> You clearly don&#8217;t read anything I post and then look like a fool on a public forum, I posted this in post #77:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not only have we established that you can not compile a coherent sentence but that you also can not read. Do you see that part that i highlighted about technology transfer? Or can you not read?


 
Oh...I have responded that very well 

See again bellow:



antonius123 said:


> Again... if u don't understand or not clear, ask!
> 
> I am not responsible with your intellectual capability to catch my point.
> 
> U should understand other ppl argument' context, they may not stated the context clearly in a long sentence like in textbook or communication letter, but u could ask! that's why it is called: *"DISCUSSION"*.
> 
> *If you are smart enough and not narrow minded, you should be able to see that possibility (of product design transfer) in my arguments* which you obviously failed to see.
> 
> As a matter of fact, the way you see other people's argument and the way you discuss make me curious if you are about 12 year old



You obviously did not see that possibility in my argument, that's why you are slow and come later with argument about "product design transfer / sort of" which stupidly is self explanatory to your previous counter (that production will always need r&d).

The problem in comprehension and IQ belongs to u, not mine. 




> The fact that you even mentioned producing something under license shows that you are running out of arguments. The argument here is producing an ECM suit, obviously *no one will let China copy their designs,* so what is the point of your rant? Clearly you have none. All of your arguments are rants that try to deviate from the real matter, heck you even mock my near perfect grammar while you have the writing skills of a 6 year old.



Your reading comprehension is so pathetic. How many times should I repeat the same thing to you?

Please read again my previous post:


antonius123 said:


> Again u are demonstrating ur comprehension problem.
> *I never said china will 100% copy virgilius, I said: "china has r&d capability to develop it!"*
> 
> Why it is so difficult for you to understand simple sentence?
> maybe they are not identical in specification, but could have the same or even better performance.
> 
> I have shown u about how china develop the fastest bullet train and the fastest supercomputer to you many times, remember?



Nobody talks about china copying virgilous except you here.
Also I have explained you that my argument that we could produce without doing r&d is to show that production is totally different from r&d which your brain could not discern until now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Black Widow

Madh-allah, No news is better than this...  Dil ko sakoon mila..


----------



## ptldM3

antonius123 said:


> Oh...I have responded that very well
> 
> See again bellow:
> 
> 
> 
> You obviously did not see that possibility in my argument, that's why you are slow and come later with argument about "product design transfer / sort of" which stupidly is self explanatory to your previous counter (that production will always need r&d).
> 
> The problem in comprehension and IQ belongs to u, not mine.



And the only thing this proves is that you are still slow in the head. I have clearly and explicitly stated that under certain circumstances the ability to manufacture something without research and development is possible such as license manufacturing. You, on the other hand, start ranting of seeing the possibility in your argument--which is ironic because your argument is as empty as the universe. Moreover, you have yet to answer my question regarding the subject, and this is----what is your point?

Besides ranting about manufacturing something without research and development you have yet to justify your rants--and before you go jumping up and down calling me stupid, let me again remind you that I, myself stated what you have been yelling, so what was your rant about? How does it apply to the topic? Remember no one is going to let China copy or license produce a Virgilous type system, and yes I know you stated the same thing multiple times which only makes your argument look even more foolish. Foolish as in you brought up manufacturing something under license but then conceded the fact that no one will allow China to copy something under license---are things starting to clear up now or are you still in a confused haze?

And before you respond read the above passage one more time because clearly it is you that has been having the problems in deciphering my clearly written responses, so once again, read carefully, then think, then post.

And yes production is different from reseach and development, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure that out, but that is not an appropriate argument in the context of the Virgilous.


----------



## antonius123

ptldM3 said:


> And the only thing this proves is that you are still slow in the head. I have clearly and explicitly stated that under certain circumstances the ability to manufacture something without research and development is possible such as license manufacturing. You, on the other hand, start ranting of seeing the possibility in your argument--which is ironic because your argument is as empty as the universe. Moreover, you have yet to answer my question regarding the subject, and this is----what is your point?


Thats why I said you are stupid as you answer your own question 

You know that production without r&d is possible such as license manufacturing, but u argue/reject my statement that we could produce without r&d. 

And more pathetic thing is even until now u do not realize your stupidity.





> Besides ranting about manufacturing something without research and development you have yet to justify your rants--and before you go jumping up and down calling me stupid, let me again remind you that I, myself stated what you have been yelling, so what was your rant about? How does it apply to the topic?


What I rant is very clear from the beginning, that : "China has r&d capability to develop so called virgilous; and it is much related to the topic.

It is you that ranting useless point like grammar etc in order to excuse your failure to comprehend my points, and it is a shame and unacceptable excuse, and this excuse demonstrate your problem with IQ or verbal capability.




> Remember no one is going to let China copy or license produce a Virgilous type system, and yes I know you stated the same thing multiple times which only makes your argument look even more foolish. Foolish as in you brought up manufacturing something under license but then conceded the fact that no one will allow China to copy something under license---are things starting to clear up now or are you still in a confused haze?


You have stated the same thing/argument that I have replied/answered/broken multiple times. It means you have failed to understand my very simple reply, and it demonstrate your ignorance and idiocy.

I have said many times that China could develop virgilous with her own r&d, not by copying, and you are full of ignorance.

Besides, you have made another stupid statement above saying that no one will allow china to copy..... as if somebody else except china would be allowed to copy. 

What a stupidhead  copying military technology basically is not allowed for anyone - not only china; and china doesn't require somebody permission for copying/re.

But again.. nobody talk about china copying except ignorant and stupid one like you




> And before you respond read the above passage one more time because clearly it is you that has been having the problems in deciphering my clearly written responses, so once again, read carefully, then think, then post.


I have, but from your ignorance and repeating the things that I have answered many times, it is obvious that you haven't read my passage carefully.




> And yes production is different from reseach and development, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure that out, but that is not an appropriate argument in the context of the Virgilous.


 
I am not saying the difference of them in context of virgilous. Like i said many times to you and you are ignorant/ fail to understand, I am saying the difference of production and r&d because you were mixing them up and thought they were the same 

I said: china has r&d capability to develop virgilous, and it has nothing to do with china current incapability to produce virgilous, because you ranting on the claim that china is incapable to produce it (inconsistently  )

My advice to you: read my argument carefully and think before replying, this is in order for you to avoid repeating stupid argument that I have answered well many times without your showing capability to broke yet.

I am expecting you could move ahead in the discussion by not repeating something that I have answered many times but you many times fail to see.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yasir_Tiger

*The Russian 117S Engine*


----------



## S10




----------



## Aramsogo

^^^^^^

Needs this for his butthurt...


----------



## tvsram1992

Aramsogo said:


> ^^^^^^
> 
> Needs this for his butthurt...


since how many days are you using it?


----------



## rcrmj

MiG-21 said:


> Good! Let them stick with their Junk Fighter 17s and Junk 10s. Good for everybody! The chinese govt industries can make profits and kickbacks by making junks and the rest of the world stays safe. Everybody wins.


 lol``at least contain your inferior complexity well and use your brain to troll if you have one


----------



## ptldM3

antonius123 said:


> Thats why I said you are stupid as you answer your own question
> 
> You know that production without r&d is possible such as license manufacturing, but u argue/reject my statement that we could produce without r&d.
> 
> And more pathetic thing is even until now u do not realize your stupidity.




No knucklehead, I clearly stated that production without research and development is possible as long as it is licensed production . Other then that, it is not possible to mass produce even a cup without research and development.

Get it or do I need to go really sloooowwww? 






antonius123 said:


> What I rant is very clear from the beginning, that : "China has r&d capability to develop so called virgilous; and it is much related to the topic.
> 
> It is you that ranting useless point like grammar etc in order to excuse your failure to comprehend my points, and it is a shame and unacceptable excuse, and this excuse demonstrate your problem with IQ or verbal capability.





Your rant is not clear and can hardly be related to the subject---again. What does license production have to do with the Virgilous? No one will let China copy it, remember? So your entire argument has been counter productive.. If you have a grasp of the English language you would know I stated license production is possible without research and development, and you would know that license production is totally not relevant to our discussion of developing something on your own.

So if we do a review we will see that your argument is totally unrelated and worthless, and it does not prove anything other then you have poor debating skills.







antonius123 said:


> You have stated the same thing/argument that I have replied/answered/broken multiple times. It means you have failed to understand my very simple reply, and it demonstrate your ignorance and idiocy.
> 
> I have said many times that China could develop virgilous with her own r&d, not by copying, and you are full of ignorance.







No knucklehead, you have stated that China can produce something without research and development and I agreed as long as it is based on license production. I never claimed that China can not produce a similar system to the Virgilous, instead I claimed it would be impossible to replicate the Virgilous, since it&#8217;s unique.






antonius123 said:


> Besides, you have made another stupid statement above saying that no one will allow china to copy..... as if somebody else except china would be allowed to copy.
> 
> What a stupidhead  copying military technology basically is not allowed for anyone - not only china; and china doesn't require somebody permission for copying/re.





Wow, did I just read that correctly? Do you think China gives a rats tail if copying is allowed or not? China has a long history of copying.








antonius123 said:


> I am not saying the difference of them in context of virgilous. Like i said many times to you and you are ignorant/ fail to understand, I am saying the difference of production and r&d because you were mixing them up and thought they were the same





I always knew the difference between production and research. Remember early in the discussion I stated that it is possible to produce something without research and development as long as its license based? Don&#8217;t blame your poor memory and reading skills on me.







antonius123 said:


> I am expecting you could move ahead in the discussion by not repeating something that I have answered many times but you many times fail to see.




Likewise, I&#8217;m expecting for you to be careful about what you accuse me of because everyone of your claims has been disproven by my earlier posts.


----------



## antonius123

ptldM3 said:


> No knucklehead, I clearly stated that production without research and development is possible as long as it is licensed production . Other then that, it is not possible to mass produce even a cup without research and development.
> 
> Get it or do I need to go really sloooowwww?



I have told you many times, u are very sloow.

And the most stupid and funniest thing of you is: your argument about production by licensing (without our own r&d) is opposing what you have arguing/debating me when I said we could produce without r&d 

Do you now realize why I said you are stupid head? 



> Your rant is not clear and can hardly be related to the subject---again. What does license production have to do with the Virgilous? No one will let China copy it, remember? So your entire argument has been counter productive.. If you have a grasp of the English language you would know I stated license production is possible without research and development, and you would know that license production is totally not relevant to our discussion of developing something on your own.
> So if we do a review we will see that your argument is totally unrelated and worthless, and it does not prove anything other then you have poor debating skills.



U are verly2 slow.

Nobody said somebody give license or let china copy virgilous, I said china develop virgilous with her own R&D.

U are really stupid head, no wonder u miss understand many things as you are so ignorant and incapable to comprehend the simplest thing 




> No knucklehead, you have stated that China can produce something without research and development and I agreed as long as it is based on license production. I never claimed that China can not produce a similar system to the Virgilous, instead I claimed it would be impossible to replicate the Virgilous, since its unique.



Stupidhead.. I said china could produce virgilous with her own r&d; Nobody said china will produce virgilous by license, copy, etc.

It is you that are moronic, mixing up both r&d and production capability and claiming that china would not produce virgilous without copying/stealing/getting license/etc 




> Wow, did I just read that correctly? Do you think China gives a rats tail if copying is allowed or not? China has a long history of copying.



Thats why I am saying u were stupid.

U said china could not copy because Europe/Usa wont allow china to copy... what a stupid statement, as you know most copying is done without agreement/license from the owner of the tech 

And am telling you what I have said from the beginning: "China has r&d capability to develop virgilous, etc"




> I always knew the difference between production and research. Remember early in the discussion I stated that it is possible to produce something without research and development as long as its license based? Dont blame your poor memory and reading skills on me.


I dont forget.

I only laugh at your because you are answering what you were questioning 

At first you argued/debated me about production without r&d, but later you said production actually could be done without r&d by license, it is opposing your own argument.

It is pathetically stupid.




> Likewise, Im expecting for you to be careful about what you accuse me of because everyone of your claims has been disproven by my earlier posts.



Your earlier and repeated post has been answered/broken by me repeatedly without your capability to counter back properly except by repeating again and again the answered argument like a spoiled cd player


----------



## ptldM3

antonius123 said:


> I have told you many times, u are very sloow.
> 
> And the stupid thing is: you are answering what you were questioning me
> 
> Now do you realize that you dont need to question me about that production without r&d, as you already answer that possibility




The only one slow here is you, how many times must I remind you that I clearly, explicitly and very directly stated that you not need research and development to produce something under license, but in all other circumstances you need research and development.

Clearly I&#8217;m debating with a grade A moron that can&#8217;t put two and two together.







antonius123 said:


> U are verly2 slow.
> 
> Nobody said somebody give license or let china copy virgilous, I said china develop virgilous with her own R&D.
> 
> U are really stupid head, no wonder u miss understand many things as you are so ignorant and incapable to comprehend the simplest thing





This just proves your lower intellect. It was you that mentioned developing something under license, remember? I never questioned China developing an ECM suit, instead I stated that it would be impossible to develop something identical to the Virgilous. 

The part highlighting your lower intellect is that you mentioned both matters, even worst is that both the subjects of license production and China&#8217;s research and development share no common grounds. Further, I know you said China can develop the Virgilous, I have quoted you, what is your point?






antonius123 said:


> Stupidhead..
> 
> I said china could produce virgilous with her own r&d;
> Nobody said china will produce virgilous by license, copy, etc.





Again, a sign of your lower intellect. When did I imply that you said someone will let China license copy the Virgilous?







antonius123 said:


> It is you that are moronic, mixing up both r&d and production capability and claiming that china would not produce virgilous without copying/stealing/getting license/etc



Your are a shameless liar. When did I ever mix up research and development with production? I stated that a product can be produced without research and development as long as its under license. You seem to have a hard time grasping that don&#8217;t you?

And China can not produce the Virgilous without copying it, not because they are dumb but because it is unique and without physically studying it they will not be able to produce it, no one will. China can built an ECM that might be similar to the Virgilous but it will not be the same thing.






antonius123 said:


> Thats why I am saying u were stupid.
> 
> U said china could not copy because Europe/Usa wont allow china to copy... what a stupid statement,






How is that stupid? it&#8217;s true. Even China&#8217;s AWACS deal with Israel was cancelled due to US pressure, so you are the stupid one? 







antonius123 said:


> as you know most copying is done without agreement/license from the owner of the tech





Tell me something I didn&#8217;t know&#8230;







antonius123 said:


> And am telling you what I have said from the beginning: "China has r&d capability to develop virgilous, etc"





No they don&#8217;t and I explained why. They would need to physically have a Virgilous system to copy it. Let me, tell you a little secret, ECM&#8217;s all differ, even the forms of jamming varies, there are many methods of jamming, how can you be sure what type the Virgilous uses? The point is to copy the Virgilous, remember? So it would have to be identical, not similar not better, but identical.






antonius123 said:


> I dont forget.
> 
> I only laugh at your answering what you were questioning
> 
> At first you argued/debated me about production without r&d, but later you said roduction actually could be done without r&d by license, it is opposing your own argument.
> 
> It is pathetically stupid.






No, the only thing pathetic is you. Producing something under license is distinctly different from producing something on your own--the discussion was about China&#8217;s ability to produce the Virgilous, obviously China can not produce the Virgilous unless it is licensed and I stated many times no one will grant China a license to produce the Virgilous, so for China to produce something similar to the Virgilous they will need to conduct research and development. Or in other words, China producing something like the Virgilous under license is out of the question so they will definitely need research and development---let me say that again they will definitely need research and development. Understand or do I need to repeat myself again?






antonius123 said:


> Your earlier and repeated post has been answered/broken by me repeatedly without your capability to counter back properly except by repeating again and again the answered argument like a spoiled cd player




The problem is not me but you and your inability to comprehend anything I say.


----------



## antonius123

ptldM3 said:


> The only one slow here is you, how many times must I remind you that I clearly, explicitly and very directly stated that you not need research and development to produce something under license, but in all other circumstances you need research and development.
> 
> Clearly Im debating with a grade A moron that cant put two and two together.



If you have known about this, then why did you ask it to me?
Why did you argue my statement saying that we could produce without r&d?

Who is grade A moron here if? 




> This just proves your lower intellect. It was you that mentioned developing something under license, remember? I never questioned China developing an ECM suit, instead I stated that it would be impossible to develop something identical to the Virgilous.



I never said china would produce virgilous under license, I said many timest china could produce virgilous with her own r&d

So you are the one with lowest intellect here 




> The part highlighting your lower intellect is that you mentioned both matters, even worst is that both the subjects of license production and Chinas research and development share no common grounds. Further, I know you said China can develop the Virgilous, I have quoted you, what is your point?



I mention both matters in different context.
I mentioned china has strong r&d capability to develop virgilous
I mentioned we could produce without our own r&d

What make you confused with those simple sentences? 
You seem so confused that mix them up, then blame me for your being confused and inability to distinguish the points of 2 different sentences? what a pathetic IQ 

Btw i have told you that i explain production without r&d to show u the difference of both because u mixed them up. Are u sick of dimentia? 




> Again, a sign of your lower intellect. When did I imply that you said someone will let China license copy the Virgilous?


If your intellect is not that low, why are u ranting about china's problem with copying virgilous while other are ranting argument about china's virgilous production by own r&d?




> Your are a shameless liar. When did I ever mix up research and development with production? I stated that a product can be produced without research and development as long as its under license. You seem to have a hard time grasping that dont you?



U forgot ur own argument bellow:



ptldM3 said:


> Do you ever actually think before you push the post button? If China has the R&D to develop the Virgilus (which you claimed they did) than what or why do they lack in capability? Key words here are research and development. So *if China can come up with an idea which is the research part and than have the ability to produce it which is the development part* than why are they incapable of developing the Virgilus?



You claim that Production is Development part of R&D which is totally wrong 

IT is obvious that u cant distinguish R&D and Production, and mixed them up.

Admit it! you cant expect other people to forgot your mistaken claim and try to run 




> And China can not produce the Virgilous without copying it, not because they are dumb but because it is unique and without physically studying it they will not be able to produce it, no one will. China can built an ECM that might be similar to the Virgilous but it will not be the same thing.


Again U repeat argument that I have counter without your ability to broke my counter.

Whether due to ur dementia, or ur tried to forget because u have no more excuse to run from stupid claim.

- I have asked u the base of your claim above.
- I also have explained that no rule in this universe prevent somebody to catch other technology and build something with the same or even more effectiveness.
- I have given u 2 examples: 1st is the fastest bullet train, 2nd longsoon chip; both are built by china and both are not totally the same as Germany/Japanese Bullet Train and Intel CPU.

Where is ur counter for those? 




> How is that stupid? its true. Even Chinas AWACS deal with Israel was cancelled due to US pressure, so you are the stupid one?



Again u miss my point; more prove ur stupidity

I said it was a stupid statement, because copying doesnt require any other consent.

Copying is stealing in nature, it is called stealing because we take it without the consent of the owner, do you understand?? so ur saying nobody will allow china to copy is a foolish statement.

China could do that by many ways including intruding to target's database as she has done by stealing secret of F-35, and that doesnt require any consent.

So ur saying that nobody will allow china to copy is a stupid claim.




> Tell me something I didnt know


Already above .. 





> No they dont and I explained why. They would need to physically have a Virgilous system to copy it. Let me, tell you a little secret, ECMs all differ, even the forms of jamming varies, there are many methods of jamming, how can you be sure what type the Virgilous uses? The point is to copy the Virgilous, remember? So it would have to be identical, not similar not better, but identical.



We dont need to follow exactly the same system/configuration in order to obtain the same performance. It is if we are talking about r&d.

Longsoon is one example how China CPU could reach the same performance with Intel CPU without having exactly the same way of Intel CPU. So ur above argument fail.

Talking about copying/stealing, china could steal Typhoon' Virgilous System by the same way as she intruding to Lockheed data base. so based on copying sense, ur argument above also fails.




> No, the only thing pathetic is you. Producing something under license is distinctly different from producing something on your own--the discussion was about Chinas ability to produce the Virgilous, obviously *China can not produce the Virgilous unless it is licensed* and I stated many times no one will grant China a license to produce the Virgilous, so for China to produce something similar to the Virgilous they will need to conduct research and development. Or in other words, China producing something like the Virgilous under license is out of the question so they will definitely need research and development---let me say that again they will definitely need research and development. Understand or do I need to repeat myself again?



This is not true, see my explanation above.
Remember, I also have replied you many times for this argument, but u failed to counter back instead of repeating the same thing.

Like u, i also believe nobody will grant china the virgilous technology.

But China could produce by her own r&d, even stealing (if she want).





> The problem is not me but you and your inability to comprehend anything I say.



If that is the case, why u repeat the same thing that I have replied without bringing counter that breaking my reply?

Ur repeating things that I have answered proves it is you that have problem to comprehend and IQ

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Malik Alashter

It looks like China is really buying the Su-35 I have read this in Defense-talk???? so how come China talk about fifth Gen. fighter or the J-15 that the say its comparable to the F-18 and rafale???? my question is if I make great airplane like that why should I buy similar one.


----------



## antonius123

@ptldM3

ptldM3, yuuhuuuu.... this is a very interesting article for your opening eyes and learning 
China has stolen sensitive data/tech of F-35 system from BAE System (is this one of the company that developed virgilius ECM for Eurofighter Typhoon? )


*Security experts admit China stole secret F-35 fighter jet plans*
_The Australian, March 12, 2012 12:00AM _

*CHINESE spies hacked into computers belonging to BAE Systems, Britain's biggest defence company, to steal details about the design, performance and electronic systems of the West's latest fighter jet, senior security figures have disclosed.*

The Chinese exploited vulnerabilities in BAE's computer defences to steal vast amounts of data on the $300 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, a multinational project to create a plane that will give the West air supremacy for years to come, according to the sources.

The hacking attack has prompted fears that the fighter jet's advanced radar capabilities could have been compromised.

Details of the attack on BAE have been a closely guarded secret within Britain's intelligence community since it was first uncovered *nearly three years ago*. But they were disclosed by a senior BAE executive during a private dinner in London for cyber security experts late last year.

One of those present said: "The BAE man said that *for 18 months, Chinese cyber attacks had taken place against BAE and had managed to get hold of plans of one of its latest fighters*."

BAE said: "We don't comment on allegations of cyber attacks against the company. BAE Systems' own cyber security capability can detect, prevent and rectify such attacks."

A former US official, speaking last week on condition of anonymity, said the BAE Systems element of the JSF program had "almost certainly" been penetrated.

However, he cautioned: "There are lots of aspects of weapons development. At least some aspects of it (the F-35 project) were targeted successfully by the Chinese. They didn't steal everything that was on that airplane, just some aspects."

The Chinese embassy in London described the claims as a "baseless allegation".

It said China condemned all forms of online crime.

Suspicions that the Joint Strike Fighter had been targeted by Chinese hackers first emerged in the US media in 2009.

The Sunday Times

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian


===========================================================================================


Nobody could disapprove china from stealing and copying.

The question is: which one is more advanced between Typhoon Avionics and F-35 Avionics?


----------



## Yeti

By Reuben F Johnson

3/16/2012


Russian fears that China would copy its Sukhoi Su-35 fighter aircraft may yet scupper a deal that Moscow and Beijing are reportedly close to signing for an export sale of the fighter to the People's Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF).

A source in the Russian government told the influential Moscow daily Kommersant : "The two sides are in practical agreement regarding the delivery to the PRC [People's Republic of China] of 48 Su-35s at a cost of USD4 billion."

However, reports on this sale continue with the additional detail that "an unanticipated obstacle to the deal has emerged. Moscow is requiring that Beijing provide a *legally binding guarantee *that it will refrain from making reverse-engineered copies of the Russian fighter - largely so that this does not create a potential competitor in the market to sell the aircraft to other countries. China is no hurry to provide this guarantee."

Russian sources close to the Federal Service for Military-Technical Co-operation (FSVTS) state that such a guarantee "is an essential condition" of the sale. Some of the same industry sources point out that the Chinese have used their assistance from Russia or have copied designs to create competitors for almost every class of combat aircraft that Russian industry offers for export and they do not want a repeat of this experience.
215 of 937 words 



Russian industry wary of Su-35 sale to China


----------



## pilli

whats the need of Su35 when we have J20 performing wonders?


----------



## Yeti

pilli said:


> whats the need of Su35 when we have J20 performing wonders?





J20 uses russian engines your Chinese engines not up to the job

Chinese

As of now, the J-20 flies with two Russian AL-31F jet engines it borrowed from the Russian Su-27 fighter jet that entered Chinese service in the mid-1980s. 


China also tried to put engines of their own on a second test J-20 vehicle, but the copycat of the Soviet engine AL-31F made by China is not in the same league as the Russian analogue for reliability and durability.

The real problem is both *AL-31F and Chinese version are engines of the previous generation.*


----------



## no_koadsheding_plz

as for those who say china copying,, i should tell them its useless to reinvent the wheel,, and copying is when china uses no own logic,
but fact is china is using ownn machinery,own knowledge brain and all the commerial off the shelf now how to make something that fits their use,,

and as far as the goal is to make something immune of foreign pressure its good,,,

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aramsogo

This is so funny and predictable. I think Chinese member "Aerospace Engineer" already predicted this would be the Russian response to Chinese MOD denial of any purchases.

BTW, not a single Indian has made good their pledge in the Su-35 Charity Challenge (also fully predictable).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yeti

Not suprising Russia wants to put a water tight contract in place to stop the Chinese doing that they did with the J-11.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nitetrogen70

this doesn't make sense why would the Russians even sell them the fighter if they know that china might copy it


----------



## Agnostic_Indian

what about the news that China officially denied the purchase?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## canadian icehole

Agnostic_Indian said:


> what about the news that China officially denied the purchase?



I'm guessing that someone at Janes.com didn't get the memo.


----------



## Yeti

nitetrogen70 said:


> this doesn't make sense why would the Russians even sell them the fighter if they know that china might copy it




Russia will only sell with a secure contract in place thats why no deal for SU35 has been signed.


----------



## Yasir_Tiger

The Real Problem behind this sale is 117S Russian Engines For J-20 Fighter Jet As Ws-15 is not Ready Yet.


----------



## Akasa

The only thing they are wary about is that the Su-35 won't attract much export offers, especially when the indigenous J-15 and J-11B offer just as much upgrades.


----------



## Ammyy

SinoSoldier said:


> The only thing they are wary about is that the Su-35 won't attract much export offers, especially when the indigenous J-15 and J-11B offer just as much upgrades.



Main problem is that only India and China can afford such heavy plane in large number but both countries dnt want to induct it... with their own reasons


----------



## ao333

Yasir_Tiger said:


> The Real Problem behind this sale is 117S Russian Engines For J-20 Fighter Jet As Ws-15 is not Ready Yet.



It took the Chinese 15 years to copy and IOC the AL-31F. I wouldn't expect this WS-15 to be ready anytime this decade given that it just started about 5 years ago.



DRDO said:


> Main problem is that only India and China can afford such heavy plane in large number but both countries dnt want to induct it... with their own reasons



The problem isn't affording them. The Chinese don't like spending money on foreign products, and has been "taught" a lesson during the Opium War -- that without copying the West like the Japanese did, they would never dominate the region again.

As for the Indians, there is no such pressure to "indigenize" or "copy" since the country isn't a Communist oligarchy. The level of Indian influence compared to the Chinese in global political organizations such as the UN and in economic clout like trade/FDI is abysmal. India is not pursuing a "global" agenda to promote its self-interest, which is why it is not conflicting with the US, EU and Russia on anything, while China is colliding with all 3.

But in all seriousness, the reason why India has now become the world's largest arms importer is because China has passed that stage and began the more sophisticated process of copying. An infant mimics their parents without understanding the actions at first {buying}, then it begins to memorize and understand textbook materials {copying} and as the human ages, he begins inventing his own way of life {innovating}.

The Soviets from the Germans, the Japanese from the English, and even the Americans from both the English and Germans have all passed through this stage. China is undergoing the same process and India, if it is to step onto the global stage will pass through this stage too. Hopefully, the Chinese here won't be trolling you guys too much on that when the time comes.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

LMAO...48 Su-35s at a cost of USD4 billion or 80 millions per aircraft it's expensive...as I said on other thread that 48 are not enough to protect entire China, not to mention that this aircraft is been fully strech to it limits as development for 4th gen fighter and will soon replace by 5th gen such PAK/FA...if China want to buy Su-35 it is for the latest 4th gen technologies..

if Russia wants legally binding guarantee that China will refrain from making reverse-engineered copies...I dont see what is core interest for China to acquire this aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Russians are pissed that China doesn't even look at their technology anymore, so they keep crying that China is copying their technology.

Too much narcissism for those Ruskies.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## timetravel

Good if the Russians dont give the engines and their planes to China, then they wont have anything to copy


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

timetravel said:


> Good if the Russians dont give the engines and their planes to China, then they wont have anything to copy



We are happy if their media can leave us alone, because we are not interested to their military technology at all just as in the same way as you are not attractive towards a 50 years old hooker.

The truth might hurt their ego so much.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## timetravel

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> We are happy if their media can leave us alone, because we are not interested to their military technology at all just as in the same way as you are not attractive towards a 50 years old hooker.
> 
> The truth might hurt their ego so much.


it will hurt ur tech programmes much more


----------



## FairAndUnbiased

timetravel said:


> it will hurt ur tech programmes much more


 
lmao no, its more like this:

Russia: China will immediately buy 48 Su-35s.
China: No we won't.
Russia: We are worried about selling to China. I don't think we will sell after all. This is because we're wary of selling, not because they straight out refused.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## timetravel

FairAndUnbiased said:


> lmao no, its more like this:
> 
> Russia: China will immediately buy 48 Su-35s.
> China: No we won't.
> Russia: We are worried about selling to China. I don't think we will sell after all. This is because we're wary of selling, not because they straight out refused.



China: plz give engines to me. 3-4 for copy.
Russia: No I wont sell until its min order 50-60
China: (that will be expensive) Ok we will buy
Russia: But u need to sign contract that will guarantee u wont copy
China damn that is why i needed it) I need time
Russia: China engine deal was close
China: No we wont buy( when cant copy what will i do)


----------



## amidamaru

even if china garunteed it.. i would still not trust them.. they are sneaky and cannot be trusted with anything


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

amidamaru said:


> even if china garunteed it.. i would still not trust them.. they are sneaky and cannot be trusted with anything



But your gorverment trust us, we're exploiting Australia mine...seems that your gorvernment like us the sneaky chineses more that you do..while your ex-priminister's daughter in law is happen to be chinese ...LMAO

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## FairAndUnbiased

timetravel said:


> China: plz give engines to me. 3-4 for copy.
> Russia: No I wont sell until its min order 50-60
> China: (that will be expensive) Ok we will buy
> Russia: But u need to sign contract that will guarantee u wont copy
> China damn that is why i needed it) I need time
> Russia: China engine deal was close
> China: No we wont buy( when cant copy what will i do)


 
we already bought hundreds of engines. you can't copy an engine, the metallurgy is almost impossible to copy, but of course illiterate 4 years average schooling Indians don't know that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aramsogo

timetravel said:


> China: plz give engines to me. 3-4 for copy.
> Russia: No I wont sell until its min order 50-60
> China: (that will be expensive) Ok we will buy
> Russia: But u need to sign contract that will guarantee u wont copy
> China damn that is why i needed it) I need time
> Russia: China engine deal was close
> China: No we wont buy( when cant copy what will i do)



Use some simple logic. China and the PLA are a good 20x richer (cash rich) today than when they first ordered the SU-27 15 years ago. How can the SU-35 possibly be "Too expensive" today. Only with Indian Logic, LOL.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WS-10 Engine

ruskie junk fell apart during that recent mission to mars.

china has its own engines, own missiles, own fighters, own submarines, etc.

pretty soon the ruskies will come to china to beg for technology.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## timetravel

FairAndUnbiased said:


> we already bought hundreds of engines. you can't copy an engine, the metallurgy is almost impossible to copy, but of course illiterate 4 years average schooling Indians don't know that.


that is why WS-10 and others still not successful.. but u can still try to copy SU-35 and make cheap copies(although inferior) and this could affect Russian market. so they dont want u to copy.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

timetravel said:


> Good if the Russians dont give the engines and their planes to China, then they wont have anything to copy



Come from an Indian that don't even know how to build a basic aircraft such LCA...that still need western expertise...

Fisrt you Indian don't know how to copy...so pretend to be innocent
Second...you dare not to copy because your gorvernment don't have gut to do it
Thirth you Indian's are banished from use "copy" for face International retaliation
...the best you can do it's come to here trying to piss us with "copy"....try harder

To be clear with you...Regarless if Russian give engines and su-35 technologies or not...it's not gonna have an impact in our national security...with a budget of 100 billions...we can diversify our defense strategy...without saying that we can invest a big chunk of money into the basic foundation of R&D on aerospace...

Russian don't sell anything..they don't get anything neither...4 billions pour into our R&D..we can create alot of Jobs and recruit a pool of Talent people for future defense development...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## timetravel

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Come from an Indian that don't even know how to build a basic aircraft such LCA...that still need western expertise...
> 
> Fisrt you Indian don't know how to copy...so pretend to be innocent
> Second...you dare not to copy because your gorvernment don't have gut to do it
> Thirth you Indian's are banished from use "copy" for face International retaliation
> ...the best you can do it's come to here trying to piss us with "copy"....try harder
> 
> To be clear with you...Regarless if Russian give engines and su-35 technologies or not...it's not gonna have an impact in our national security...with a budget of 100 billions...we can diversify our defense strategy...without saying that we can invest a big chunk of money into the basic foundation of R&D on aerospace...
> 
> Russian don't sell anything..they don't get anything neither...4 billions pour into our R&D..we can create alot of Jobs and recruit a pool of Talent people for future defense development...



so better invest. but its not gonna give results, as the habit of copying does not change, irrespective of $$ u pump in. Thank God India does not have that habit.


----------



## WS-10 Engine

timetravel said:


> that is why WS-10 and others still not successful.. but u can still try to copy SU-35 and make cheap copies(although inferior) and this could affect Russian market. so they dont want u to copy.



yea and that is why the J-11B is flying without an engine. 
WS-10 is an imaginary engine.


81iq indian logic.
just because india is unable to make their own engines dont mean we are as inferior as you lot.

indians just dont have the IQ to make their own engines, its simple as that.
indian knowledge is extremely limited

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## amidamaru

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> But your gorverment trust us, we're exploiting Australia mine...seems that your gorvernment like us the sneaky chineses more that you do..while your ex-priminister's daughter in law is happen to be chinese ...LMAO



can you copy and steal natural resources by reverse engineering?? your logic is flawed lol

sure we export to you, we import from you, thats how trade works around the world??

next time try using something else for your silly retorts

and ex PM daughter is NOT chinese.. she is australian lol.. she just lives in china


----------



## WS-10 Engine

timetravel said:


> so better invest. but its not gonna give results, as the habit of copying does not change, irrespective of $$ u pump in. Thank God India does not have that habit.



indians dont have the IQ needed to understand the technical details of making their own weapons, thats why you buy all your weapons from foreigners.

81 IQ is close to retardation, how the heck can you make your own weapons with that number.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

This topic is created based on a fake news, hopefully it would be sunk at the bottom.


----------



## WS-10 Engine

amidamaru said:


> can you copy and steal natural resources by reverse engineering?? your logic is flawed lol
> 
> sure we export to you, we import from you, thats how trade works around the world??
> 
> next time try using something else for your silly retorts
> 
> and ex PM daughter is NOT chinese.. she is australian lol.. she just lives in china



they all understand our language, because the 21st century belongs to china.
its our world, you just live in it.


----------



## amidamaru

WS-10 Engine said:


> they all understand our language, because the 21st century belongs to china.
> its our world, you just live in it.



here we go again, most australians dont speak chinese?? and still more foreigners speak english then they do chinese.

your world?? this is the kind of stupid thinking that will backfire on you... the world does not belong to china, the 21st century is not china's either. it is really funny actually...its like when first pictures of the aircraft carrier you guys got went public.. suddenly your navy could destroy americas easily.... geez when you get 3 carriers you will think the worlds combined navy would not match chinas... can you not see how arrogant.. well not it goes well beyond arrogant... that you guys are?? 

china has a lot of people, but when it comes down to it, your a long way away from being anywhere near the strongest military in the world


----------



## Akasa

DRDO said:


> Main problem is that only India and China can afford such heavy plane in large number but both countries dnt want to induct it... with their own reasons



Australia was presented with this as well but chose F-35 instead.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

timetravel said:


> so better invest. but its not gonna give results, as the habit of copying does not change, irrespective of $$ u pump in. Thank God India does not have that habit.



Only you India don't get any result such LCA or Arjunk..for over 30 years of time & money...GOD blessing India to keep that habit...
When we invest...is for long term...ofr over 30 years..we have build a pools of young scientist and engineers for our futures..and we're starting to collect fruit from our labor...

J-20 might not be perfect but we evil chinese can be proud off and better than GOD blessing India throw billions in other's pocket and expect to claim as FAKE sentiment as national pride on PAK/Fa.

Our Varyat aircraft carrer is rebuilt by our technicians and engineers unlike God blessing India that throw 2.3 billions for Russians to rebuilt and refit a second hand carrier...you did nothing for your nation but create jobs for others..LMAO




amidamaru said:


> can you copy and steal natural resources by reverse engineering?? your logic is flawed lol
> 
> sure we export to you, we import from you, thats how trade works around the world??
> 
> next time try using something else for your silly retorts
> 
> and ex PM daughter is NOT chinese.. she is australian lol.. she just lives in china



My logic is flawed??? I perfectly answed to your statement that" *-->Chineses are sneaky and cannot be trusted with anything*" so why your gorvernment trade with us if they don't trust us? we bought 1$ of Autralian mine...we make 10$ for turn it out to be finish product...or buy Iranium and make nuke warhead and your gorverment seems to be very happy regarless of resource or reverse engineering.

I advise you Australian try to make something usefull yourself that you can be proud off instead come to give your silly statement about Chinese : By calling Chinese as sneaky...don't make yoursef any better...LMAO


----------



## amidamaru

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Only you India don't get any result such LCA or Arjunk..for over 30 years of time & money...GOD blessing India to keep that habit...
> When we invest...is for long term...ofr over 30 years..we have build a pools of young scientist and engineers for our futures..and we're starting to collect fruit from our labor...
> 
> J-20 might not be perfect but we evil chinese can be proud off and better than GOD blessing India throw billions in other's pocket and expect to claim as FAKE sentiment as national pride on PAK/Fa.
> 
> Our Varyat aircraft carrer is rebuilt by our technicians and engineers unlike God blessing India that throw 2.3 billions for Russians to rebuilt and refit a second hand carrier...you did nothing for your nation but create jobs for others..LMAO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My logic is flawed??? I perfectly answed to your statement that" *-->Chineses are sneaky and cannot be trusted with anything*" so why your gorvernment trade with us if they don't trust us? we bought 1$ of Autralian mine...we make 10$ for turn it out to be finish product...or buy Iranium and make nuke warhead and your gorverment seems to be very happy regarless of resource or reverse engineering.
> 
> I advise you Australian try to make something usefull yourself that you can be proud off instead come to give your silly statement about Chinese : By calling Chinese as sneaky...don't make yoursef any better...LMAO



why trade?? money perhaps?? why else does anyone trade??

australia is world leaders in many respects in many industries... and we actually make quality products lol not things that break in 2 weeks after purchase lol


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

amidamaru said:


> why trade?? money perhaps?? why else does anyone trade??
> 
> australia is world leaders in many respects in many industries... and we actually make quality products lol not things that break in 2 weeks after purchase lol



But your Australians...like to buy something that last for 2 weeks...so they can get something news...either they can't afford or they really trust chinese product...explain me why on earth after seeing the label "Made in China"..they still buy?...is there a rational explaination?


----------



## amidamaru

i guess we buy it because it is sold so cheap?? but if we read label that says made in china everyone thinks ohh god how long is this gunna last.. it is definitely not high quality.. and it not just australians who think that, you find the same sentiments around the world, its a well known fact.

i can tell you now.. no one trusts a chinese made product... you get what you pay for i guess lol

i think in some cases people dont look where it is made... and in most cases they do know where it is made, but figure well i can buy 6 made in china products, or 1 made in australia product.... in a lot of cases if your lucky the chinese made product will last enough time for them to buy a quality product... i have bought for instance.. 4 webcams made in china... i bought them because they sold for like $10 and i didnt have much money at the time and i needed the webcam.,.. not only did they lie about what megapixel it was.. but every single one of them had problems within 2 weeks, and stopped working within 2 months lol... i bought another cam paid $40 and i have had this 6 months with no issues


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

amidamaru said:


> i guess we buy it because it is sold so cheap?? but if we read label that says made in china everyone thinks ohh god how long is this gunna last.. it is definitely not high quality.. and it not just australians who think that, you find the same sentiments around the world, its a well known fact.
> 
> i can tell you now.. no one trusts a chinese made product... you get what you pay for i guess lol
> 
> i think in some cases people dont look where it is made... and in most cases they do know where it is made, but figure well i can buy 6 made in china products, or 1 made in australia product.... in a lot of cases if your lucky the chinese made product will last enough time for them to buy a quality product... i have bought for instance.. 4 webcams made in china... i bought them because they sold for like $10 and i didnt have much money at the time and i needed the webcam.,.. not only did they lie about what megapixel it was.. but every single one of them had problems within 2 weeks, and stopped working within 2 months lol... i bought another cam paid $40 and i have had this 6 months with no issues



As you say clearly "*you get what you pay for*"...and you still complaining that chinese product break after 2 week?


----------



## S10

Every year since 2008, Indians and Russians apparently "sold" Su-35 to China, even after Chinese government denied any such plans to purchase the plane. Thanks for verbally equipping us with a plane we don't need or want.


----------



## amidamaru

yes i do.. they are clearly not upto standard lol

i wont buy chinese crap anymore, i rather spend more money on quality australia products lol


----------



## FairAndUnbiased

amidamaru said:


> yes i do.. they are clearly not upto standard lol
> 
> i wont buy chinese crap anymore, i rather spend more money on quality australia products lol


 
rocks? 10char


----------



## amidamaru

rocks?? lol we have a very big manufacturing industry, quality products dont come cheap lol


----------



## conworldus

I wouldn't mind spending 4 billion on the Su-35 if Russia just throw in half of Siberia and Sharapova as well... Otherwise, thanks but no thanks.


----------



## S10

amidamaru said:


> yes i do.. they are clearly not upto standard lol
> 
> i wont buy chinese crap anymore, i rather spend more money on quality australia products lol


The computer you are posting crap with, at the very minimum the silicon comes from "crap" rare earth in China. Turn it off please.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## amidamaru

S10 said:


> The computer you are posting crap with, at the very minimum the silicon comes from "crap" rare earth in China. Turn it off please.



lol, just lucky my computer was not made in china lol


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

amidamaru said:


> yes i do.. they are clearly not upto standard lol
> 
> i wont buy chinese crap anymore, i rather spend more money on quality australia products lol



 remember you get what you pay for: sure pays more for quality product made in Australia if you can afford.


----------



## amidamaru

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> remember you get what you pay for: sure pays more for quality product made in Australia if you can afford.



sure can afford it... realistically it not too expensive... but if you could save $30 on something.. a lot of people think why not

$30 is not much


----------



## qwerrty

-russians made up news about china purchasing 48 su-35...in all articles that indians posted not long ago no mentioning of afraid of copying or anything. they seemed very happy with the orders..
-chinese says there's no such thing happening
-russian losers come up with an excuse to save face *exactly* as predicted by some members here

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## qwerrty

ohh..'russia refuses to sell arresters' is also busted! wonder what excuses they have for this too?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sweetgrape

Sometime ago, the news that Russia Reports said china is closed to buy SU-35 attract too much indian, then china officially denied that, then the indian and other trolls keep silent some time, now, they grasp the variant news and rush to mock china again!!!
Nothing special, for a loser, mouth is their strongest weapon. A countries that spend more than 30 years on simple LCA, and still not finish the job, and import almost of all key components from other countries. can't produce conventional submarine, then mock china nuke sub! It is ridiculous itself!!!
On the topic. the news that Russia Report published before is fake, Now, you still believe it? Are you nuts?
I don't care now what kind of engine the J20 use, I just care and believe, when they are inducted, the home-made engine is ready for it!!!
And when Indian plane can use the India-grown engine. Maybe you should learn how to produce all your bullets first!!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## WS-10 Engine

Indians still can't make their own bullets. 

The opinion of the white man is the most important thing for indians, it's all due to being a slave of the white man since 1700's until today. 

Democracy was forced on them, English language was forced on them, British law and education systems were forced on them. 
Pretty much everything India has is all British. The Brits eliminated indian culture and forced their culture on Indians.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## sweetgrape

amidamaru said:


> can you copy and steal natural resources by reverse engineering?? your logic is flawed lol
> 
> sure we export to you, we import from you, thats how trade works around the world??
> 
> next time try using something else for your silly retorts
> 
> and ex PM daughter is NOT chinese.. she is australian lol.. she just lives in china


What do you have? you just is a follower of USA, no USA, you are sh!t!!!
So what? Does that mean you control china government? You think your mouth is not smelly?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

This is the conclusion that I have arrived at.

Why do some people get so hyped up whenever they hear claims about Su-35 sale? Why do some people still do even after it was denied? Because that's all they can do. There's a saying: "it is the weakest dog that barks the loudest". Instead of showing what they can do, they attempt to put down what others do, and even fail at that. Instead of announcing to the world their own achievements, all they can do is to spread a smear campaign against the achievements of others and bury their heads into sand.

Please realize that whenever India buys something, Indians are happy. When China is claimed to buy something, Chinese are not happy. This says something; that India is happy and accustomed to rely on others while China already knows that it does not need to; hence the anger when claims are made.

China does not need to be like this because their achievements speak for themselves.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## manqiangrexue

This is interesting. Did China enter negotiations with Russia for Su-35? What&#8217;s going on? Here are some situations that people have suggested and my analysis on each:

Situation 1: China wants to buy some fighters from Russia to keep the relationship going between the 2 countries.
Supporting arguments: China does not seem to have a requirement for these aircraft. 48 is a small number to order if China, in fact, needed this aircraft because its own jets were not performing well. On the other hand, China would like to strengthen its relationship with Russia to avoid Russia leaning to India.
Refuting arguments: To keep relationships going, there are many deals the China could make with Russia that could benefit China clearly, such as energy deals or a commercial jetliner deal (COMAC929 which Russia has expressed interest in co-developing from its Ilyushin 86). Otherwise, maybe China would order Tu-160 to replace its H-6 or order the SAM-400. These would effectively keep the relationship going without buying 48 odd fighters. Also, if this were the purpose, then the deal should have been reached instead of being officially denied by China to have ever occurred.
Overall Possibility of Situation: 3.75/10 Remotely possible

Situation 2: China wants to buy the aircraft because there are a few components on it such as engines that China would like to learn from.
Supporting arguments: Although China is fielding its own fighter aircraft and in some areas have achieved similar expertise to Russia, there may very well be some parts that China would like to improve on. The Su-35 should embody these improvements unless a PAK-FA deal is reached, which is highly unlikely. Possibly radar and engine are China&#8217;s focus on buying this aircraft so that it can learn from them an improve its domestic design. Buying only 2-4 aircraft would be impossible as Russia would not earn enough money to give its secrets away but China does not want to buy 200 aircraft just to learn something so 48 is a compromise. 
Refuting arguments: If all China wanted was the engine and radar, Russia just might sell these to China. The Russians certainly sell engines to China so I don&#8217;t see why China couldn&#8217;t just pay about $6-7 million (guessing based on the $3.5-4 million price for AL-31FN) each for about 200 AL-41 engines. Even paying more ($20 million) each for the engine would be better than buying whole aircraft for it! Cash-strapped Russia could not turn an offer like that down ($4 billion for 200 AL-41). If China wanted the technologies badly, it would accept the no-copy clause and copy it anyway. Reverse-engineering is already illegal; what sense does it make to have a clause stating that something that is already illegal is still illegal? What sense does it make for China to refuse the clause? It would cause the contract to fall apart and everything would be back to square 1. If China wanted to copy them, they would buy them, and break the contract and copy them.
Overall Possibility of Situation: 7.5/10 likely

Situation 3: China feels that its J-10 and J-11 are outmatched by India&#8217;s MKI and Rafale, so it needs the Su-35 to level things out.
Supporting arguments: The J-10 and J-11 have not gone to battle and their capabilities have not been officially disclosed so they may perform under par compared to Western and Russian designs.
Refuting arguments: If this was the case, 48 would not be the purchase number. If China felt endangered, it would swiftly purchase 300 Su-35 to defend itself and it would agree not to copy them (however reliable that promise is). It would tell Russia to keep the deal silent, as it did with the MKK deal. Buying more aircraft would make the price cheaper as well. Also, it is unlikely for China to mass-produce aircraft that it felt were sub-par. It would continue to develop more prototypes improving its design while buying Russian jets to defend itself in the meantime. Only after it felt that its domestic fighters were formidable would it begin mass-production as doing so before then is clearly wasting money. Also, with all the Chinese reverse-engineering and espionage from the F-35 program (which is supposed to have the most advanced avionics package of any aircraft, superior to even the Raptor), it is likely that the systems in the J-10 and J-11 are very advanced. 
Overall Possibility of Situation: 2/10 Not likely

Situation 4: Russia made it up. Maybe a Chinese general complimented the Su-35 over dinner and Russia did the rest.
Supporting arguments: Russia wants to sell the Su-35. India refused to buy it. So who will? To give the jet a reputation boost, such a story can be made so people believe that China wants the jet. If China wants the jet, then is probably means that it is better than Chinese jets, and the Rafale, which, in both cases, is saying a lot. If it were better than the Rafale, it is likely better than the Typhoon, since the latter lost to the former in the Indian tender. If people believe that the Su-35 were better than all these aircraft, that would bode well for its sales. When it turns out that China does not buy them, Russia can simply say that China refused the no-copy clause so the deal fell apart. Russia says it happened; China says it didn&#8217;t. Nobody knows what to believe for sure.
Refuting arguments: Might jeopardize Russian credibility and may slightly upset Sino-Russian relations. After all, if your friend tells people that you tried to buy his homework when you didn&#8217;t he can&#8217;t expect you to react very happily.
Overall Possibility of Situation: 6.5/10 Could be

Situation 5: China wanted to pretend to do the deal so it could feign weakness to foreign powers so that if conflict arose, China would have its enemies under-estimating it.
Supporting arguments: China has always spoken softly and believes that threatening people by overstating your capabilities is foolish. Rather, China prefers to understate its abilities and let its opponents find out when it&#8217;s too late. This is ingrained in Chinese philosophy and all Chinese , from a young age, were taught to speak modestly but improve viciously. At the 2008 Olympics, Chinese coaches stated that China was only a minnow compared to Russia and America at sports but stunned the world with 51 gold medals at closing, beating the US by 15 and more than doubling Russia&#8217;s 23. Even Chinese fighters like the J-10A that have been introduced for nearly a decade have not had its performance specs made public. China could feign weakness for free since it knows that Russia would try to stop it from copying and it could refuse, thus making it look like it failed to obtain superior aircraft. 
Refuting arguments: Feigning weakness would embolden Taiwan, India, the US, and Japan. This could lead to conflict. With China&#8217;s military advancing rapidly, it is smart to bide time rather than promote conflict. Also, feigning weakness could strike a blow to nationalism if it made Chinese citizens feel that the government did not improve its military quickly and well enough.
Overall Possibility of Situation: 5.5 Possible


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

manqiangrexue said:


> This is interesting. Did China enter negotiations with Russia for Su-35? What&#8217;s going on? Here are some situations that people have suggested and my analysis on each:
> 
> Situation 1: China wants to buy some fighters from Russia to keep the relationship going between the 2 countries.
> Supporting arguments: China does not seem to have a requirement for these aircraft. 48 is a small number to order if China, in fact, needed this aircraft because its own jets were not performing well. On the other hand, China would like to strengthen its relationship with Russia to avoid Russia leaning to India.
> Refuting arguments: To keep relationships going, there are many deals the China could make with Russia that could benefit China clearly, such as energy deals or a commercial jetliner deal (COMAC929 which Russia has expressed interest in co-developing from its Ilyushin 86). Otherwise, maybe China would order Tu-160 to replace its H-6 or order the SAM-400. These would effectively keep the relationship going without buying 48 odd fighters. Also, if this were the purpose, then the deal should have been reached instead of being officially denied by China to have ever occurred.
> Overall Possibility of Situation: 3.75/10 Remotely possible
> 
> Situation 2: China wants to buy the aircraft because there are a few components on it such as engines that China would like to learn from.
> Supporting arguments: Although China is fielding its own fighter aircraft and in some areas have achieved similar expertise to Russia, there may very well be some parts that China would like to improve on. The Su-35 should embody these improvements unless a PAK-FA deal is reached, which is highly unlikely. Possibly radar and engine are China&#8217;s focus on buying this aircraft so that it can learn from them an improve its domestic design. Buying only 2-4 aircraft would be impossible as Russia would not earn enough money to give its secrets away but China does not want to buy 200 aircraft just to learn something so 48 is a compromise.
> Refuting arguments: If all China wanted was the engine and radar, Russia just might sell these to China. The Russians certainly sell engines to China so I don&#8217;t see why China couldn&#8217;t just pay about $6-7 million (guessing based on the $3.5-4 million price for AL-31FN) each for about 200 AL-41 engines. Even paying more ($20 million) each for the engine would be better than buying whole aircraft for it! Cash-strapped Russia could not turn an offer like that down ($4 billion for 200 AL-41). If China wanted the technologies badly, it would accept the no-copy clause and copy it anyway. Reverse-engineering is already illegal; what sense does it make to have a clause stating that something that is already illegal is still illegal? What sense does it make for China to refuse the clause? It would cause the contract to fall apart and everything would be back to square 1. If China wanted to copy them, they would buy them, and break the contract and copy them.
> Overall Possibility of Situation: 7.5/10 likely
> 
> Situation 3: China feels that its J-10 and J-11 are outmatched by India&#8217;s MKI and Rafale, so it needs the Su-35 to level things out.
> Supporting arguments: The J-10 and J-11 have not gone to battle and their capabilities have not been officially disclosed so they may perform under par compared to Western and Russian designs.
> Refuting arguments: If this was the case, 48 would not be the purchase number. If China felt endangered, it would swiftly purchase 300 Su-35 to defend itself and it would agree not to copy them (however reliable that promise is). It would tell Russia to keep the deal silent, as it did with the MKK deal. Buying more aircraft would make the price cheaper as well. Also, it is unlikely for China to mass-produce aircraft that it felt were sub-par. It would continue to develop more prototypes improving its design while buying Russian jets to defend itself in the meantime. Only after it felt that its domestic fighters were formidable would it begin mass-production as doing so before then is clearly wasting money. Also, with all the Chinese reverse-engineering and espionage from the F-35 program (which is supposed to have the most advanced avionics package of any aircraft, superior to even the Raptor), it is likely that the systems in the J-10 and J-11 are very advanced.
> Overall Possibility of Situation: 2/10 Not likely
> 
> Situation 4: Russia made it up. Maybe a Chinese general complimented the Su-35 over dinner and Russia did the rest.
> Supporting arguments: Russia wants to sell the Su-35. India refused to buy it. So who will? To give the jet a reputation boost, such a story can be made so people believe that China wants the jet. If China wants the jet, then is probably means that it is better than Chinese jets, and the Rafale, which, in both cases, is saying a lot. If it were better than the Rafale, it is likely better than the Typhoon, since the latter lost to the former in the Indian tender. If people believe that the Su-35 were better than all these aircraft, that would bode well for its sales. When it turns out that China does not buy them, Russia can simply say that China refused the no-copy clause so the deal fell apart. Russia says it happened; China says it didn&#8217;t. Nobody knows what to believe for sure.
> Refuting arguments: Might jeopardize Russian credibility and may slightly upset Sino-Russian relations. After all, if your friend tells people that you tried to buy his homework when you didn&#8217;t he can&#8217;t expect you to react very happily.
> Overall Possibility of Situation: 6.5/10 Could be
> 
> Situation 5: China wanted to pretend to do the deal so it could feign weakness to foreign powers so that if conflict arose, China would have its enemies under-estimating it.
> Supporting arguments: China has always spoken softly and believes that threatening people by overstating your capabilities is foolish. Rather, China prefers to understate its abilities and let its opponents find out when it&#8217;s too late. This is ingrained in Chinese philosophy and all Chinese , from a young age, were taught to speak modestly but improve viciously. At the 2008 Olympics, Chinese coaches stated that China was only a minnow compared to Russia and America at sports but stunned the world with 51 gold medals at closing, beating the US by 15 and more than doubling Russia&#8217;s 23. Even Chinese fighters like the J-10A that have been introduced for nearly a decade have not had its performance specs made public. China could feign weakness for free since it knows that Russia would try to stop it from copying and it could refuse, thus making it look like it failed to obtain superior aircraft.
> Refuting arguments: Feigning weakness would embolden Taiwan, India, the US, and Japan. This could lead to conflict. With China&#8217;s military advancing rapidly, it is smart to bide time rather than promote conflict. Also, feigning weakness could strike a blow to nationalism if it made Chinese citizens feel that the government did not improve its military quickly and well enough.
> Overall Possibility of Situation: 5.5 Possible



It has already been proved to be fake by the Chinese Ministry of Defence.

And your analysis is full of BS.


----------



## PaperDragon

Sigh~ my "proud" Chinese friends, what is the point to argue with that Russian* guy called ptldM3 in English? You know he's probably not even a Russian (You guys probably can tell, if a Russian that is good at English, he must be a westernized Russian. This could be that he isn't a true Russian). If you guys really want to argue with him, please learn some proper English. A: because it's frustrating for someone like me to understand exactly what you are saying. B: Since most of your English is so meaningless that it almost made you guys sound like complete idiots arguing with a god. 
If you Chinese guys and that Russian guy want to spread you nationalism about your country, go do it somewhere else but not here. The topic is whether the China has officially denied Su-35 purchase! (Btw, my country is dead! So, I do not care if the new Russia wants to sell those military toys to China)
As what I researched from internet: 
A: Chinese officials deny the Russian offers and claim it to be fake news.
B: Russian news confirm the fact that China is buying the Su35 (even after the official deny)
C: According to new news from China (using the Google translates) Russian top general believe it would be better to sell the Su35 jet to Vietnam than China.
D: According the news from Russia: experts believe it is unlikely to sell the next generation Su 35 to China due to violation of arms copyright in China. 
As far as I know, btw you Chinese fan boy need to know this, all the number one or indigenous technologies are not originated from China. Just use your latest so called indigenous modern plane C919 as an example, other than the shell of that plane is made in China (because you know, the stolen tech from making Airbus A320) all the control, navigation units, and safety features are almost all made in USA. Oh! the engine is French/American. Oh c'mon are you really going to say that your #1 super computer (that is beaten by the Japanese {Jin} super computer) is filled with American made microchips? If China really wants to develop its technologies, with vast amount of money and smart Asians, how come the result is different? Because your government are bunch corrupt to crooks constantly stealing the money from the hard working class nation to some other country. So stop think China is rich fan boys because China clearly in a starve situation, and your governments just made those values of GDP on top of their mindless heads. 
IF you Chinese fan boys really want to compare the living condition to Russian or India, it really says it all~ Russian and India does have a better living standard compare to China, and so is their freedom. 
How the **** China's government can even be called "the communist China party" when there is not a single bit close being a communism. Perhaps you Chinese don't even know what communism means. 
China is an authoritarian, totalitarian, and mono-party dictatorship. That's it! Don't ever bring up China have freedom because it doesn't have any. If I was in China writing stuff like this... I would probably be shot the next day!


----------



## Edevelop

There are not many Indians here now. So much so for their arguments against China buying it. Well no more of their chest thumping that wasted many threads and uncountable number of posts...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## conworldus

dont worry you wont be shot in china. in china, being retarded is not a crime.






PaperDragon said:


> Sigh~ my "proud" Chinese friends, what is the point to argue with that Russian* guy called ptldM3 in English? You know
> 
> he's probably not even a Russian (You guys probably can tell, if a Russian that is good at English, he must be a westernized Russian. This could be that he isn't a true Russian). If you guys really want to argue with him, please learn some proper English. A: because it's frustrating for someone like me to understand exactly what you are saying. B: Since most of your English is so meaningless that it almost made you guys sound like complete idiots arguing with a god.
> If you Chinese guys and that Russian guy want to spread you nationalism about your country, go do it somewhere else but not here. The topic is whether the China has officially denied Su-35 purchase! (Btw, my country is dead! So, I do not care if the new Russia wants to sell those military toys to China)
> As what I researched from internet:
> A: Chinese officials deny the Russian offers and claim it to be fake news.
> B: Russian news confirm the fact that China is buying the Su35 (even after the official deny)
> C: According to new news from China (using the Google translates) Russian top general believe it would be better to sell the Su35 jet to Vietnam than China.
> D: According the news from Russia: experts believe it is unlikely to sell the next generation Su 35 to China due to violation of arms copyright in China.
> As far as I know, btw you Chinese fan boy need to know this, all the number one or indigenous technologies are not originated from China. Just use your latest so called indigenous modern plane C919 as an example, other than the shell of that plane is made in China (because you know, the stolen tech from making Airbus A320) all the control, navigation units, and safety features are almost all made in USA. Oh! the engine is French/American. Oh c'mon are you really going to say that your #1 super computer (that is beaten by the Japanese {Jin} super computer) is filled with American made microchips? If China really wants to develop its technologies, with vast amount of money and smart Asians, how come the result is different? Because your government are bunch corrupt to crooks constantly stealing the money from the hard working class nation to some other country. So stop think China is rich fan boys because China clearly in a starve situation, and your governments just made those values of GDP on top of their mindless heads.
> IF you Chinese fan boys really want to compare the living condition to Russian or India, it really says it all~ Russian and India does have a better living standard compare to China, and so is their freedom.
> How the **** China's government can even be called "the communist China party" when there is not a single bit close being a communism. Perhaps you Chinese don't even know what communism means.
> China is an authoritarian, totalitarian, and mono-party dictatorship. That's it! Don't ever bring up China have freedom because it doesn't have any. If I was in China writing stuff like this... I would probably be shot the next day!


----------



## masoomchichora

Russia-China Su-35 Fighter Talks Frozen





12:31 17/04/2012
KUALA LUMPUR, April 17 (RIA Novosti)

Negotiations on the sale of Russian advanced Su-35 Flanker-E fighters to China have been put on hold over Beijing&#8217;s refusal to buy a large consignment, Russian state-controlled arms exporter Rosoboronexport said on Tuesday.
&#8220;We have been promoting the Su-35 fighter on the Chinese market,&#8221; Rosoboronexport deputy chief Viktor Komardin said.
&#8220;However, China only wants to buy a limited number [of aircraft] whereas we want [to sell] a large consignment to make [the deal] economically viable.&#8221;
He offered no indication of the numbers involved
The negotiations have been ongoing for more than one and a half years.
http://en.ria.ru/world/20120417/172871006.html


----------



## tvsram1992

masoomchichora said:


> Russia-China Su-35 Fighter Talks Frozen
> 
> KUALA LUMPUR, April 17 (RIA Novosti)
> 
> Negotiations on the sale of Russian advanced Su-35 Flanker-E fighters to China have been put on hold over Beijing&#8217;s refusal to buy a large consignment, Russian state-controlled arms exporter Rosoboronexport said on Tuesday.
> &#8220;We have been promoting the Su-35 fighter on the Chinese market,&#8221; Rosoboronexport deputy chief Viktor Komardin said.
> &#8220;However, China only wants to buy a limited number [of aircraft] whereas we want [to sell] a large consignment to make [the deal] economically viable.&#8221;
> He offered no indication of the numbers involved
> The negotiations have been ongoing for more than one and a half years.


any link? It would burst the bubbles of few Chinese dreamers present over here.


----------



## masoomchichora

Russia-China Su-35 Fighter Talks Frozen




12:31 17/04/2012
KUALA LUMPUR, April 17 (RIA Novosti)

Negotiations on the sale of Russian advanced Su-35 Flanker-E fighters to China have been put on hold over Beijings refusal to buy a large consignment, Russian state-controlled arms exporter Rosoboronexport said on Tuesday.
We have been promoting the Su-35 fighter on the Chinese market, Rosoboronexport deputy chief Viktor Komardin said.
However, China only wants to buy a limited number [of aircraft] whereas we want [to sell] a large consignment to make [the deal] economically viable.
He offered no indication of the numbers involved
The negotiations have been ongoing for more than one and a half years.
Russia-China Su-35 Fighter Talks Frozen | World | RIA Novosti


----------



## masoomchichora

u can see the link in my above post


----------



## Speeder 2

RIA Novosti has next to zero credibility on China military affairs. 

For how many years, how many times, on so many different Chinese military gears, RIA Novosti has

just talked from its backside and been exposed repeatedly as a tabloid news channel.


It gonna bull$hit about this "China want to import Su-35 thing" well into 2025 every other year, trust me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ammyy

Speeder 2 said:


> RIA Novosti has next to zero credibility on China military affairs.
> 
> For how many years, how many times, on so many different Chinese military gears, RIA Novosti has
> 
> just talked from its backside and been exposed repeatedly as a tabloid news channel.
> 
> 
> It gonna bull$hit about this "China want to import Su-35 thing" well into 2025 every other year, trust me.



Just like you want to purchase arrester for your Aircraft carrier ????


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

DRDO said:


> Just like you want to purchase arrester for your Aircraft carrier ????



This rumor has been debunked long time ago as well.


----------



## tony singh

China has resumed negotiations with Russia over the purchase of "4++ generation" Sukhoi Su-35 multirole fighters. Although Moscow and Beijing had been discussing a deal for over two years, China halted the process for several months after details of the talks appeared in the Russian media.

A large Russian delegation met Chinese representatives on the eve of Airshow China in Zhuhai to make an additional presentation on the Su-35. United Aircraft president Mikhail Pogosyan and Russian air force commander Gen Viktor Bondarev were among the members of the Russian delegation. 

Commenting on the resumption of the Su-35 negotiation process, a high ranking member of the Russian delegation said relatively slow progress with next-generation Chinese fighter designs has led Beijing to seek ways to purchase a quantity of the best Russian fighters to bridge the gap. 

Today, the Su-35 is the most advanced Russian heavyweight multirole fighter available for export sales. The more recent PAK-FA (T-50) is not considered sufficiently mature to be offered to China. Russia is working with India on the customised FGFA, but this is a co-development programme - an arrangement not available to China.

Moscow is ready to sell China a quantity of Su-35 fighters provided Beijing places a worthwhile order, "not merely a couple of specimens for reverse engineering", says a member of the Russian delegation. In particular, Russia is ready to sell China a substantial number of NIIP Irbis third-generation radars with passive electronic scanning and NPO Saturn Item 117S engines as part of a would-be Su-35 purchase.



AIRSHOW CHINA: China resumes talks with Russia on Su-35 purchase

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rcrmj

lol to the russians``why they keep making up those false news, maybe trying to lure Indians since the russians havent been good at keeping their current biggest costomer happy```

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## tony singh

From what I know flightglobal is a well known reputable site


----------



## ANPP

IF it true than chinese 5 gen fighter dream is too far

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tony singh

China is keen to get it's hands on the 117S engine as well as the NIIP Irbis

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ammyy

ANPP said:


> IF it true than chinese 5 gen fighter dream is too far



Every thing is unclear till J10B for Pakistan arrives, only then we know about real chinese capabilities


----------



## qwerrty

we hear about this news on every zhuhai airshow. don't believe. do a search on forum


----------



## ahfatzia

The way the Russian delegation sounds clearly indicates this deal is bogus. no sane businessman would use that kind of wording if he wants a business deal: 

*"not merely a couple of specimens for reverse engineering"*

The Russians are brunt but they're not stupid.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## qwerrty

*Airshow China 2006 airshow*
Russia's Sukhoi markets new multi-role fighter at Chinese air show
Ria Novosti,Russia ^ | 31/ 10/ 2006
*ttp://en.rian.ru/russia/20061031/55256972.html 

*Airshow China 2008 airshow*
..corresponding department confirmed that negotiations with China regarding Su-35 have been conducted..
*ttp://www.kommersant.com/p895011/The_first_visit_of_President_Medvedev_to_China/
*ttp://trishulgroup.blogspot.com.au/2008/11/airshow-china-2009-first-impressions.html[/QUOTE]

*Airshow China 2010*
Russia ready to sell Su-35 fighter jets to China
*ttp://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20101116/161359301.html

*5 months ago, 2012*
Russia Close to Sign Su-35 Fighter Deal With China
*ttp://en.rian.ru/world/20120306/171780246.html

*airshow china 2012*
lol  again

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## BigDaddyWatch

tony singh said:


> China has resumed negotiations with Russia over the purchase of "4++ generation" Sukhoi Su-35 multirole fighters. Although Moscow and Beijing had been discussing a deal for over two years, China halted the process for several months after details of the talks appeared in the Russian media.
> 
> A large Russian delegation met Chinese representatives on the eve of Airshow China in Zhuhai to make an additional presentation on the Su-35. United Aircraft president Mikhail Pogosyan and Russian air force commander Gen Viktor Bondarev were among the members of the Russian delegation.
> 
> Commenting on the resumption of the Su-35 negotiation process, a high ranking member of the Russian delegation said relatively slow progress with next-generation Chinese fighter designs has led Beijing to seek ways to purchase a quantity of the best Russian fighters to bridge the gap.
> 
> Today, the Su-35 is the most advanced Russian heavyweight multirole fighter available for export sales. The more recent PAK-FA (T-50) is not considered sufficiently mature to be offered to China. Russia is working with India on the customised FGFA, but this is a co-development programme - an arrangement not available to China.
> 
> Moscow is ready to sell China a quantity of Su-35 fighters provided Beijing places a worthwhile order, "not merely a couple of specimens for reverse engineering", says a member of the Russian delegation. In particular, Russia is ready to sell China a substantial number of NIIP Irbis third-generation radars with passive electronic scanning and NPO Saturn Item 117S engines as part of a would-be Su-35 purchase.
> 
> 
> 
> AIRSHOW CHINA: China resumes talks with Russia on Su-35 purchase





> Airshow China 2006 airshow
> Russia's Sukhoi markets new multi-role fighter at Chinese air show
> Ria Novosti,Russia ^ | 31/ 10/ 2006
> *ttp://en.rian.ru/russia/20061031/55256972.html
> 
> Airshow China 2008 airshow
> ..corresponding department confirmed that negotiations with China regarding Su-35 have been conducted..
> *ttp://www.kommersant.com/p895011/The_first_visit_of_President_Medvedev_to_China/
> *ttp://trishulgroup.blogspot.com.au/2008/11/airshow-china-2009-first-impressions.html
> 
> Airshow China 2010
> Russia ready to sell Su-35 fighter jets to China
> *ttp://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20101116/161359301.html
> 
> 5 months ago, 2012
> Russia Close to Sign Su-35 Fighter Deal With China
> *ttp://en.rian.ru/world/20120306/171780246.html
> 
> airshow china 2012
> lol again

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## qwerrty

just that we've seen this news already in 4 china airshow, including this year. im betting in 2014 we'll see that again.. bump this thread. if i'm wrong i'll give you $5

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## conworldus

If I get a dollar every time an Indian member posts some Russian BS about selling China Su-35s, I would have more money than the Indian GDP.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## gagaga

One after one, non stopping, "Insight, Unable to copy" while WS-10 has enter mass production and no deployed J-15 installed AL-31FN, and China is about to purchase Su-35 every year while our ministry of defense has bust it earlier this year officially, 

I have one question, which reputable English source predict the flight of J-20 and 310 01 aircraft before we post the photos in PDF and Sino defence?

mass production and induction of WS-10
http://mil.news.sina.com.cn/2012-11-13/0955706701.html

ministry of defense response to question about Su-35 purchase 2012-03-09
http://world.huanqiu.com/roll/2012-03/2511123.html

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## S10

The Chinese defence ministry has already stated they were not negotiating to purchase any Su-35. I don't know why these Russians keep making crap up. It's ridiculous since China already has J-11B, J-15 and J-16 on production line. You can't boost your sales by telling lies.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## jiki

http://idrw.org/?p=15621


> SOURCE: FLIGHT GLOBAL
> China has resumed negotiations with Russia over the purchase of &#8220;4++ generation&#8221; Sukhoi Su-35multirole fighters. Although Moscow and Beijing had been discussing a deal for over two years, China halted the process for several months after details of the talks appeared in the Russian media.
> 
> A large Russian delegation met Chinese representatives on the eve of Airshow China in Zhuhai to make an additional presentation on the Su-35. United Aircraft president Mikhail Pogosyan and Russian air force commander Gen Viktor Bondarev were among the members of the Russian delegation.
> Commenting on the resumption of the Su-35 negotiation process, a high ranking member of the Russian delegation said relatively slow progress with next-generation Chinese fighter designs has led Beijing to seek ways to purchase a quantity of the best Russian fighters to bridge the gap.
> 
> Today, the Su-35 is the most advanced Russian heavyweight multirole fighter available for export sales. The more recent PAK-FA (T-50) is not considered sufficiently mature to be offered to China. Russia is working with India on the customised FGFA, but this is a co-development programme &#8211; an arrangement not available to China.
> 
> Moscow is ready to sell China a quantity of Su-35 fighters provided Beijing places a worthwhile order, &#8220;not merely a couple of specimens for reverse engineering&#8221;, says a member of the Russian delegation. In particular, Russia is ready to sell China a substantial number of NIIP Irbis third-generation radars with passive electronic scanning and NPO Saturn Item 117S engines as part of a would-be Su-35 purchase.


Is Rafael is the solution or going to be upgraded su30s (super sukhois) ?
but at present configuration surely there is a gap between su-30mki and su-35


----------



## hk299792458

This kind of fake news let me think about the Tu-22M, some "russian sources" confirmed and reconfirmed that China is going to purchase this bomber, and this since more or less 10 years and reappeared every 6 months...

And now? What's the reality?

So, what else?


----------



## Obambam

Don't worry. This news resurface itself every time they see a Chinese air show. 
No sane sales person would be say the following if they are serious about their sale: _not merely a couple of specimens for reverse engineering_.

We are also making wonderful progress in 5th gen with two running projects already made public so far.


----------



## ahfatzia

Obviously the Airshow is the place where the Chinese aerospace industry to showplace their wares for commercial purposes and the Russians, by putting out such news every time, want to undermine and belittle the Chinese companies in order to sabotage such efforts for their own gains. It's understandable because their defense industry is about the only sector they can compete with other countries.


----------



## DrSomnath999

jiki said:


> China resumes talks with Russia on Su-35 purchase | idrw.org
> Is *Rafael *is the solution or going to be upgraded su30s (super sukhois) ?
> but at present configuration surely there is a gap between su-30mki and su-35


1ST of all kid learn to spell that plane properly then come back with your clueless posts?




i

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gagaga

negotiation of Su-35 procurement is true
&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#33487;&#38669;&#20234;&#38598;&#22242;&#20170;&#26085;&#21521;&#26032;&#28010;&#32593;&#21069;&#26041;&#25253;&#36947;&#32452;&#35777;&#23454;&#65292;&#20013;&#22269;&#20891;&#26041;&#27491;&#22312;&#19982;&#33487;&#38669;&#20234;&#25509;&#35302;&#36141;&#20080;Su-35&#36229;&#20391;&#21355;&#25112;&#26007;&#26426;

contract of 48 Su-35 procurement signed is fake
&#20013;&#22269;&#39539;&#26021;&#20174;&#20420;&#36141;&#20080;48&#26550;&#33487;-35&#25112;&#26426;&#25253;&#36947;


----------



## jiki

DrSomnath999 said:


> 1ST of all kid learn to spell that plane properly then come back with your clueless posts?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i



ok tell me what is so cluless abt it , truly i didn't get u ? regarding the spell check if i will write skuoi-30 every one here(every one here in som way a military enthusiast) will get it as sukhoi, so i think its not gonna be an issue.


----------



## S10

Every year since 2008, Russians claim China is negotiating for purchase of Su-35. Even when the Defence Ministry denied having any plans to purchase Su-35 earlier this year, the Russians keep at it. Perhaps they think if they make the claim long enough, China will buy the plane out of annoyance?

Interesting sales strategy......

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 帅的一匹

The deal will be signed within next year, and the first induction will be on 2015. China originally only want 4, but Russian wanna make it 48. So 24 is the number of Compromise. This will give huge boost for China Su-series combat jets development. CCTV 4 also talked about the purchase of Su35 from Russia yesterday.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 帅的一匹

Personally, i think this is a right decision made by PLAAF. It render China to check in the best combat of Su-series. It might serve in the PLAAF's Opposing Force and provide advanced technology study platform. We should properly using our purchasing power while doing lots of self-reliance R&D.


----------



## SamranAli

good news... I dont see any influence of any so called super power.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

MY brother, we should tone down a little bit. Otherwsie someone gonna piss in pants.

We should build up a postitive military relationship with Russia . In the future, there might be potential military deal from bothway. As long as China and Russia stick together, US of A won't be able to devour the whole world.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## S10

No official news and not even a link? I'll take this one with a grain of salt. Every year since 2008, there's been words of China buying Su-35 and they all turned out to be empty air. Even earlier this year the Chinese defence ministry had to post a statement denying such news.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BigDaddyWatch

Another Russian made announcement lets wait for official confermation first. I'm still highly skeptical about it and personally i would rather see China invest that money in it's own domestic aerospace development than to spend that money importing weapons from other countries.


----------



## 帅的一匹

Instead of waste money of investing in US bond, why not go for something like Su35? China got trillions of USD reserve. If India can, why China can't? It's typical way of Russia to bang India by selling weapons to China.


----------



## 帅的一匹

Su-35 is the best one in Su series, PLAAF could make it serve in opposing force to train our pilots, especailly a better one than MKI.&#30693;&#24049;&#30693;&#24444;&#65292;&#30334;&#25112;&#19981;&#36294;&#12290;



BigDaddyWatch said:


> Another Russian made announcement lets wait for official confermation first. I'm still highly skeptical about it and personally i would rather see China invest that money in it's own domestic aerospace development than to spend that money importing weapons from other countries.


Russian tech is not a peice of crap, we should utilize it to enhance our ability.&#20013;&#22830;18&#22823;&#26126;&#30830;&#25351;&#20986;&#65292;&#38450;&#27490;&#33021;&#21147;&#19981;&#36275;&#12290;


----------



## 帅的一匹

Although J-20 is state of art 5th gen fighter, we still need fighter like SU35 to provide good study platform to improve China type of Su fighters.


----------



## StormShadow

China now is in a position to develop 5th gen fighters. Why would they want to import a 4.5 gen fighter? What signal does it send to the potential export customers of it's 5th gen plane? So..this news may not be true


----------



## 帅的一匹

It just cost China 1.5 billions of USD, peanuts money.



StormShadow said:


> China now is in a position to develop 5th gen fighters. Why would they want to import a 4.5 gen fighter? What signal does it send to the potential export customers of it's 5th gen plane? So..this news may not be true


The signal is Russia is not happy about India recent performence in weapon procurement.


----------



## BigDaddyWatch

wanglaokan said:


> Instead of waste money of investing in US bond, why not go for something like Su35? China got trillions of USD reserve. If India can, why China can't? It's typical way of Russia to bang India by selling weapons to China.



I agree with you that buying US bonds is a waste of money but i also believe that buying the SU-35 is a waste of money too. And especially when you're talking about such small numbers. If China spend the money and time buying and waiting for the SU-35 it's better to invest both the money and time into the domestic aerospace industries.

I don't know what you're sources are but i just went both to the Xinhua and ITAR-TASS websites and i have read nothing about this deal. and its also not being talked about in the meeting between president Hu and the Russian defence minister in Beijing today.


----------



## 帅的一匹

Lots of India ostensibly say you dont care whether China will go for Su35 or not, but i know where is your soft touch.


----------



## A.Rafay

StormShadow said:


> China now is in a position to develop 5th gen fighters. Why would they want to import a 4.5 gen fighter? What signal does it send to the potential export customers of it's 5th gen plane? So..this news may not be true



someone's back already started buring!!


----------



## 帅的一匹

BigDaddyWatch said:


> I agree with you that buying US bonds is a waste of money but i also believe that buying the SU-35 is a waste of money too. And especially when you're talking about such small numbers. If China spend the money and time buying and waiting for the SU-35 it's better to invest both the money and time into the domestic aerospace industries.
> 
> I don't know what you're sources are but i just went both to the Xinhua and ITAR-TASS websites and i have read nothing about this deal. and its also not being talked about in the meeting between president Hu and the Russian defence minister in Beijing today.


We need make SU35 serve in the PLAAF opposing force to train out pilots. If you could take down a SU35, why not MKI? This decision also will be welcomed by PLAAF pilots.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Black Stone

I guess this is a win-win for both China and Russia. Russia would get the money and China would get the tech know-how through reverse engineering.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MilSpec

wanglaokan said:


> Instead of waste money of investing in US bond, why not go for something like Su35? China got trillions of USD reserve. If India can, why China can't? It's typical way of Russia to bang India by selling weapons to China.



question is when china is planning to produce j20 and j31's why buy SU 35's?



Black Stone said:


> I guess this is a win-win for both China and Russia. Russia would get the money and China would get the tech know-how through reverse engineering.



But chinese members here claim they are way ahead of russia in terms of aeronautical technology? when you have the abiltiy to produce 5th gen fighters why buy a su 35, albiet all engines in the "5th gen" are still russian


----------



## akellen

Stop post FAKE news here! 

Su35 is a good bird, but China didn't interested about it. Russia want to sold Su-35 to india, that's the reason to make up this story.


----------



## MilSpec

wanglaokan said:


> We need make SU35 serve in the PLAAF opposing force to train out pilots. If you could take down a SU35, why not MKI? This decision also will be welcomed by PLAAF pilots.



So you are buying these a/c's for DACT, wont your j11 provide the same capabiities or are you saying those a/c's are inferior to MKI's?


----------



## 帅的一匹

To @sandy_3126: Seems i hit your soft touch.....



sandy_3126 said:


> So you are buying these a/c's for DACT, wont your j11 provide the same capabiities or are you saying those a/c's are inferior to MKI's?


See me rolling, people hating.


----------



## MilSpec

A.Rafay said:


> someone's back already started buring!!



question was simple but you followed it up with the dumbest answer, and btw its spelled b-u-r-n-i-n-g

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

akellen said:


> Stop post FAKE news here!
> 
> Su35 is a good bird, but China didn't interested about it. Russia want to sold Su-35 to india, that's the reason to make up this story.


Better understand something before you speak up here......


----------



## MilSpec

wanglaokan said:


> To @sandy_3126: Seems i hit your soft touch.....
> 
> 
> See me rolling, people hating.



well i dont exactly know what you mean by "soft touch", its a simple question, follow it up with a logical answer


----------



## 帅的一匹

Russian new appointed Defence minister visted China days ago............


----------



## Black Stone

sandy_3126 said:


> But chinese members here claim they are way ahead of russia in terms of aeronautical technology? when you have the abiltiy to produce 5th gen fighters why buy a su 35, albiet all engines in the "5th gen" are still russian



I don't care much about what people claim especially when there are some "interesting" members on this forum. For me, I don't see China as being ahead of Russia in Aero tech. Nobody would know what the Chinese think in business deals, perhaps is a link to a bigger deal later on, nobody knows.


----------



## 帅的一匹

sandy_3126 said:


> well i dont exactly know what you mean by "soft touch", its a simple question, follow it up with a logical answer


MKI is a air superior fighters, SU 35 is your soft touch. Understand? J11b is good enough, but not as good as SU35. We are luring on the F117S engine........come on baby

J20 is the best, but it wont work against your MKI fleet until it serve.


----------



## A.Rafay

sandy_3126 said:


> question was simple but you followed it up with the dumbest answer, and btw its spelled b-u-r-n-i-n-g



That was my mobile suggesting the first word it came up with I didn't looked at text just posted btw your question was also lame China a big country needs more fighter planes and also for exploring Russian tech !


----------



## 帅的一匹

Black Stone said:


> I don't care much about what people claim especially when there are some "interesting" members on this forum. For me, I don't see China as being ahead of Russia in Aero tech. Nobody would know what the Chinese think in business deals, perhaps is a link to a bigger deal later on, nobody knows.


Those despise Russian tech should learn some from history. Personally i'm not superstitious believing Russian tech, i thing its good one to go for when you are not that strong as you think.


----------



## MilSpec

wanglaokan said:


> MKI is a air superior fighters, SU 35 is your soft touch. Understand? J11b is good enough, but not as good as SU35. We are luring on the F117S engine........come on baby



make up your mind, and post something logical " air superior " "soft touch" "come on baby". 

If Dact training is something you are looking for, chinese flankers should provide similar capabilities, as far as air superiority is concerned, your fellow countrymen have long claimed j10 are better in that area. What new capabilities does a Su35 bring to the table here is pretty hard to imagine unless the claims previously made are false.


----------



## StormShadow

A.Rafay said:


> someone's back already started buring!!


Are you mad? Why would i be pissed off i China bought something? It was offered to India as well but was rejected.



wanglaokan said:


> The signal is Russia is not happy about India recent performence in weapon procurement.


lol... so?


----------



## MilSpec

A.Rafay said:


> That was my mobile suggesting the first word it came up with I didn't looked at text just posted btw your question was also lame China a big country needs more fighter planes and also for exploring Russian tech !



As far as need for more planes, I wonder if there is plane that can boost up the numbers????? hint: it's a forum favourite.
Russian tech: what advantages will that bring to china if they have long surpasses them as claimed by members here with development of J20/j31?


----------



## 帅的一匹

sandy_3126 said:


> make up your mind, and post something logical " air superior " "soft touch" "come on baby".
> 
> If Dact training is something you are looking for, chinese flankers should provide similar capabilities, as far as air superiority is concerned, your fellow countrymen have long claimed j10 are better in that area. What new capabilities does a Su35 bring to the table here is pretty hard to imagine unless the claims previously made are false.


J10 is a single engine air superior fighter, you should learn something better before you face MKI, something like engine with thrust vectoring. We could absorb the TV engine tech to develop our owns. F117S will work until WS15 put in service. More like a reliable transition.

The procurement will restore the military tie between China and Russia.


----------



## 帅的一匹

sandy_3126 said:


> As far as need for more planes, I wonder if there is plane that can boost up the numbers????? hint: it's a forum favourite.
> Russian tech: what advantages will that bring to china if they have long surpasses them as claimed by members here with development of J20/j31?


J20 has surpassed SU35, but it is not serving yet. Am i clear man?

Most importantly, i dont think Rafale could handle SU35 with snow leopard AESA. For MKI, J10b with AESA is enough.


----------



## MilSpec

wanglaokan said:


> J20 has surpassed SU35, but it is not serving yet. Am i clear man?



sorry brother, you didn't get the plane I implied in my post to "make up large numbers".


----------



## 帅的一匹

BY 2015, china will posess 2 types of 4th++ fighters. Ready to deal with it?



sandy_3126 said:


> sorry brother, you didn't get the plane I implied in my post to "make up large numbers".


We need SU35 for reverse engineering. At first China propose buying 4, but Russia say at least 48. And finally 24, deal!


----------



## joekrish

wanglaokan said:


> Most importantly, i dont think Rafale could handle SU35 with snow leopard AESA. For MKI, J10b with AESA is enough.



That more or less sums up everything, keep it cumming mate.


----------



## 帅的一匹

joekrish said:


> That more or less sums up everything, keep it cumming mate.


Better get some stuff better than MKI before you loose your edge too much.

Personally, i will give my salute to Russians' contribution to China defence development.


----------



## Sasquatch

To many threads on China purchasing the SU35 from Russian sources do you have a link or any source that is non russian ? I will merge this with the others threads if you don't have sources I will close the thread if true I will reopen it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## KRAIT

Hu Songshan said:


> To many threads on China purchasing the SU35 from Russian sources do you have a link or any source that is non russian ?


Kindly close these threads where good source or any source isn't provided. These threads become troll fest.


----------



## Pakistanisage

Great News.


----------



## 帅的一匹

Hu Songshan said:


> To many threads on China purchasing the SU35 from Russian sources do you have a link or any source that is non russian ? I will merge this with the others threads if you don't have sources I will close the thread if true I will reopen it.


No official news from both Goverment yet. Please at your convinience Mod.


----------



## Gessler

The su-35s are likley to be employed in maritime strike role.

This purchase shows that J-11B & J-16 are either cancelled or rejected by PLA.


----------



## Sasquatch

wanglaokan said:


> No official news from both Goverment yet. Please at your convinience Mod.



I will just merge the other threads on the SU35 deal, if it is confirmed by the government sources then I will reopen otherwise just more rumors spreading like this. 

http://www.defence.pk/forums/chinese-defence/219609-china-license-produce-tu-22-bombers-russia.html

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Gessler

wanglaokan said:


> Better get some stuff better than MKI before you loose your edge too much.
> 
> Personally, i will give my salute to Russians' contribution to China defence development.



The russians selling you 24 Su-35s at the time when India is gearing up to upgrade our 270+ MKIs
to Super Sukhoi standard (better than Su-35BM) with AESA radars, supercruising engines, twin-IRSTs,
wing-mounted L-band radars for detcting VLO targets and much more.

You'll get your first Su-35 is 2015 ?? The first 2 Super-MKIs could be in the sky by 2014 itself. And
IAF will be inducting far superior Rafale after that. Its china which needs to get better stuff than
Su35, I think maybe J-20 is delayed thats why Su-35 is being sought as interim solution.


----------



## itaskol

this news could be true.
the best way to balance the trade deficit.


----------



## kurup

Russia and China have clinched a preliminary agreement on the delivery of *48 Sukhoi Su-35BM* fighter jets to the Chinese air force, sources in Russias Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation said on Wednesday.The agreement worth *1.5 billion dollars* may add to the Su-35 foraying into international markets even though Russias cooperation with China in this field is fraught with substantial risks.

The Su-35BM is the modernized version of the T-10C platform that helped create the internationally distinguished Su-27 and Su-30 multi-role fighters. They have become the Russian-made warplanes of choice for foreign customers in the past twenty years.

Remarkably, it was China that contributed to the Su-27s breakthrough into the global markets. Between 1991 and 1996, Moscow and Beijing signed a spate of deals on the delivery of the Su-27SK and Su-30MKK fighters to the Chinese air force. A total of 26 SU-27SKs were supplied to China at the time.

Shortly after, Russia inked similar agreements with India, Malaysia, Vietnam, Algeria and other countries. As for China, it *gradually started to copycat production of the Su-27, something that finally led to the creation of the J-11 fighter, a replica of the Su-27 plane*. Despite the fact that the J-11s general characteristics yield to those of the Su-27, the very fact of copycatting added significantly to the development of Chinas military aircraft industry and the modernization of the Chinese air force in the early 2000s.

As for the Su-35 fighters, Beijing has repeatedly signaled its readiness to purchase them from Russia, with the latter understandably seeking to prevent a potential copycat production of the Su-35 by China. In this regard, B*eijing will hardly guarantee the protection of copyrights on the production of Su-35, experts say, adding that the more such planes are delivered to China the less copycat-related risks Russia will face. At least 50 Su-35s should be supplied to China so that such risks can be resolved.*

Another option is to supply a simplified version of the Su-35 to China, something that analysts say may well be used in practice.

However, the only best way to avoid the Su-35 being copycatted is to reduce drastically the delivery of Russias high-tech military equipment to China in the near future. Compensating for potential loses would be possible with the help of domestic orders to this effect.

Russia and China reached preliminary agreement for 48 Su-35BMs | idrw.org

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## selvan33

Russia to sell 24 Su-35 Fighters to China

2012-11-22 02:27:14 GMT2012-11-22 10:27:14(Beijing Time) 








.
By Yu Runze, Sina English

Russia and China have clinched a preliminary agreement on the delivery of 24 Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets to the Chinese air force, Voice of Russia reported Wednesday citing sources in Russias Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation.

According to previous reports, the formal talks will start during Russias Defense Ministers visit to China. The formal contract of the 1.5 billion dollars deal will be signed within 2 years. From 2015, Russia will begin to deliver fighters to China.

But Rosoboronexport and Sukhoi Company refused to comment on the report.

A Russian military expert commented that China Aviation Industry Group had not promoted its fighters, which were developed on the basis of Russia's Su-27 fighter jet, on the international market. Therefore Russia did not have to worry about the copycat-related risks.

Considering the complex situation, the fat deal could not be the last Su-35 deal between China and Russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TR.1

Really? China made their own jets why still buying.


----------



## selvan33

TR.1 said:


> Really? China made their own jets why still buying.





because their aircrafts are sleeping ducks


----------



## jnd3x0

and some days ago a guy from Russia administration said Russia don't arm enemies of india  *best friends for ever* .... 

China aviation industry will benefit from this move in the long run because China always have a focus on the its self reliance polices


----------



## Peregrine

selvan33 said:


> because their aircrafts are sleeping ducks



Going by this logic. All the aircrafts including SU30 in IAF are dead frogs....... that is why IAF is going for Rafales.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Viper0011.

TR.1 said:


> Really? China made their own jets why still buying.



Smart move. Called 'competitive advantage' in the business world and leverage in other terms. Russia's advanced tech is purchased, China uses it, then tests its own jets against it and develops the same or better capability. Plus uses these in one-on-one scenarios to test their products. The Russian baseline helps in measuring success and providing the up to date tech features. PLUS, this way, China has and will always have access to Russian talent and leverage over Russia!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## selvan33

Peregrine said:


> Going by this logic. All the aircrafts including SU30 in IAF are dead frogs....... that is why IAF is going for Rafales.




so what about your PAF buddy. why they are going for FC 20 when they are having worlds highly advanced sixth generation fighter jf17


----------



## Peregrine

selvan33 said:


> so what about your PAF buddy. why they are going for FC 20 when they are having worlds highly advanced sixth generation fighter jf17



When is PAF getting j10? Tell me please.


----------



## Audio

TR.1 said:


> Really? China made their own jets why still buying.



is there any confirmation from the Chinese side about this deal? This news has been around a few times before, but mainly accredited to Russian weapons dealers makiing hype around the Su-35.
If it's true it's is probably an attempt to reverse engineer the Irbis-E radar and possibly thrust vectoring technology.


----------



## selvan33

Peregrine said:


> When is PAF getting j10? Tell me please.




what are you saying brother. i read PAF gave order for 36 FC 20 in musharaf period itself with soft loans from china. 

Grande Strategy

its one small source for FC 20


----------



## HeinzG

Is Russia willing to give article 117 engine to China? Or else have they figured out one way or another China will produce such a engine?


----------



## Peregrine

jackyy said:


> nice cheerleading
> 
> most of the chini inventory has obsolete jets.They have numbers not quality.



And incredible crackbrained response from you. 
Kindly substantiate your pontification with some thing credible.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Audio

Peregrine said:


> Kindly substantiate your pontification with some thing credible.



910 fighters of 3rd generation or worse and 400 j-10, j-11, su-27 etc....search the web if you want sources they are easily found.


----------



## Peregrine

selvan33 said:


> what are you saying brother. i read PAF gave order for 36 FC 20 in musharaf period itself with soft loans from china.
> 
> Grande Strategy
> 
> its one small source for FC 20



LoL where is the official confirmation by PAF? The link you have provided says "writer believes" or "eagle hannan says"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## selvan33

Peregrine said:


> LoL where is the official confirmation by PAF? The link you have provided says "writer believes" or "eagle hannan says"




hmmm........ anyhow it will be a good news for me if they didnt buy because fc 20 will be a little threat for us


----------



## Peregrine

Audio said:


> 910 fighters of 3rd generation or worse and 400 j-10, j-11, su-27 etc....search the web if you want sources they are easily found.



J-10, SU-30, j-11, and SU-27.......... non of these is 3rd gen or obsolete by any means. If your going to base your arguement on such faulty premises, then I believe we have nothing to talk about.


----------



## xuxu1457

1.5billion$ for 48 Su-35, 31million$ one unite, what a cheap price, Is it true??
I heard that first China want to buy 4, but Russia insisted on at least 48 unites, then now 24 unites done; 

1.5 billion for 24 Su-35,62million/one is a suit price, for fill the blank of J-11 to J-20(at fast 2018 mass produce, PLAF can't wait any more), and see clear about 117S engine and its radar.

1.5billion is only 1.5% of China's year defence spending, and only the same cost of two destroyers, air force and navy are snatching military spending now.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Audio

Peregrine said:


> J-10, SU-30, j-11, and SU-27.......... non of these is 3rd gen or obsolete by any means. If your going to base your arguement on such faulty premises, then I believe we have nothing to talk about.



lol, wanna try reading it again?



> *910* fighters of 3rd generation or worse and *400* j-10, j-11, su-27 etc



Which is the majority? In the 900 category we have JH-7, J-8II, J-7, and Q-5. Which of these is above 3rd gen?


----------



## SEAL

Wow 48 jets deal in around 1.5 Bil $. 
Really nice move by China. 


SU-35 Cockpit






IRBIS-E radar.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SamranAli

well played China...


----------



## Rajaraja Chola

48 SU 35?
Well when is J 18 coming?


----------



## SamranAli

Rajaraja Chola said:


> 48 SU 35?
> Well when is J 18 coming?


What about it?? Isnt china enemy?? Or it is friend now? If so then why china killer agni-v..? You guys cheated
Russia won't arm India's enemies: Dmitry Rogozin - Economic Times

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BigDaddyWatch

I wouldn't believe this news for a second. First there was another thread that said that China was going to buy 24 jets for 1,5 billion dollars. And now its suddenly 48 ? That means that each SU-35BM would cost about 30 million dollars each. That is very cheap since i have read that each SU-35BM costs about 60 to 90 million dollars each. Second if you read the article its the Russians that claims that China has reach a agreement to buy the jets no confermation on the Chinese side yet. And we all know how credible the Russian claims regarding Chinese purchase of SU-35's are.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ringmaster

selvan33 said:


> because their aircrafts are sleeping ducks



even those ducks dn t let u guys sleep

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Tshering22

Well, desperation to launch product into the market can make a manufacturer do many things. 

But what is the significance of the number 48?


----------



## selvan33

ringmaster said:


> even those ducks dn t let u guys sleep




and why worrying about us? oh because we are not letting you guys to sleep.


----------



## Agent_47

SamranAli said:


> What about it?? Isnt china enemy?? Or it is friend now? If so then why china killer agni-v..? You guys cheated
> Russia won't arm India's enemies: Dmitry Rogozin - Economic Times



Think again,who is the real loser ? We are getting everything what we want infact more than we want.
China is replacing their old gen fighters and trying to get new tech from russia.we don't care about these addition of 48 ACs in their 2000+ inventory.
What about the third one ? the cheerleaders who daydreamed getting j10 and j31 before we get rafale? what about them?

.


----------



## selvan33

Agent_47 said:


> Think again,who is the real loser ? We are getting everything what we want infact more than we want.
> China is replacing their old gen fighters and trying to get new tech from russia.we don't care about these addition of 48 ACs in their 2000+ inventory.
> What about the third one ? the cheerleaders who daydreamed getting j10 and j31 before we get rafale? what about them?
> 
> .





yeah they dreamed, still now they are dreaming and they will dream dream dream but at last they will get 7th gen fighter jf 18(cause jf 17 is 6th gen fighter na).so be aware of that because that will be highly worst sorry best then previous.


----------



## Secur

These sort of reports are being reported for nth time now ... I wont believe until they are confirmed by the Chinese sources themselves ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## arp2041

Well this Chinese acquisition confirms my suspicion that Chinese 5th gen ac are not as sophisticated as they should have been otherwise for a country who is developing 2 fifth gen ac scheduled to inducted by 2020, buying a 4.5 gen ac off the shelf to be inducted around same time doesn't make sense. PLAAF is buying them for 2 purpose:

1. Adding a more trust able 4.5 gen ac which can act as an stop gate arrangement till there fifth gen ac can truly be called FIFTH GEN.

2. Making there own Chinese version of the ac + using some of the high tech. in the j-20/j-31.

IAF not going for su-35 makes sense since super sukhois will be nearly equal to su-35 in capability + IAF is inducting it's own 4.5 gen ac in Rafale.


----------



## Mani2020

selvan33 said:


> because their aircrafts are sleeping ducks



Kid because they can afford too, because they have their pockets filled with bucks and can afford to buy any gadget available to them , They are keeping their options open ,to develop a strong military to keep the west on their heels 

And do i need to tell you that US instead of being a super power and leading defence equipment producer too purchase gadgets from other countries so does russia ,does that mean both US and Russia produce junk? will you do yourself a favor to search if you wana or shall i provide you with a list

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UKBengali

We should wait for confirmation from China before assuming this is true.


----------



## Mani2020

arp2041 said:


> Well this Chinese acquisition confirms my suspicion that Chinese 5th gen ac are not as sophisticated as they should have been otherwise for a country who is developing 2 fifth gen ac scheduled to inducted by 2020, buying a 4.5 gen ac off the shelf to be inducted around same time doesn't make sense. PLAAF is buying them for 2 purpose:
> 
> 1. Adding a more trust able 4.5 gen ac which can act as an stop gate arrangement till there fifth gen ac can truly be called FIFTH GEN.
> 
> 2. Making there own Chinese version of the ac + using some of the high tech. in the j-20/j-31.
> 
> IAF not going for su-35 makes sense since *super sukhois* will be nearly equal to su-35 in capability + IAF is inducting it's own 4.5 gen ac in Rafale.



well it baffles me , the kind of names indian gives to their gadgets just take me of surprise .super sukhois now that is one hilarious tag, no offence to the impressive sukhois and no doubt about their future upgradable capabilities but it sounds quite lame & exaggerated specially when you have 5th generation aircrafts flying .

Back to your point. Tell me one thing if you have excessive cash wouldnot you try to grab everything you are offered with, they have too much budget and man power to manage these acquisitions plus dont forget they have around 800-1000 obsolete planes to replace ,they cant replace it with just one kind nor do they have such fast production lines, fifth gen aircrafts need some years to be operational ,so why not to buy something off the shelf.

Plus let some official news surface coz we are hearing this for sometime now


----------



## arp2041

Mani2020 said:


> well it baffles me , the kind of names indian gives to their gadgets just take me of surprise .super sukhois now that is one hilarious tag, no offence to the impressive sukhois and no doubt about their future upgradable capabilities but it sounds quite lame & exaggerated specially when you have 5th generation aircrafts flying .



Agree with u dude, actually it was the name given by the media rather than producers of sukhois or HAL, actually the name popped up since the upgrade was to include some 5th gen tech. developed for su-35 & PAK-FA.



Mani2020 said:


> Back to your point. Tell me one thing if you have excessive cash wouldnot you try to grab everything you are offered with, they have too much budget and man power to manage these acquisitions plus dont forget they have around 800-1000 obsolete planes to replace ,they cant replace it with just one kind nor do they have such fast production lines, fifth gen aircrafts need some years to be operational ,so why not to buy something off the shelf.



OK, do 48 planes are enough to replace 800-1000 ac?? Mate they have enough ac in production or planning stages which can replace them but my point stays, they don't have trust in there tech. thats why they are going for su-35s.


----------



## Mani2020

arp2041 said:


> Agree with u dude, actually it was the name given by the media rather than producers of sukhois or HAL, actually the name popped up since the upgrade was to include some 5th gen tech. developed for su-35 & PAK-FA.
> 
> 
> 
> OK, do 48 planes are enough to replace 800-1000 ac?? Mate they have enough ac in production or planning stages which can replace them but my point stays, they don't have trust in there tech. thats why they are going for su-35s.



There are some initial orders and then there are some follow ups similar to what IAF did with su-30's, if the news holds some grounds who knows we might see some follow up orders or TOT with remaining to be produced in China 

And at your point


> planning stages which can replace them


 your words "planning stages" speak volumes itself , how can you expect a rising military to wait for the aircrafts that are just in planning stage with no confirmed mass production timline and can take 5-6 years or even more to replace bulk of j-7s and q-5s. Dude every country buys the best it can even US buys so does russia as i already mentioned.Last time i heard Russia is purchasing chopper carrier from france. Now does that mean russia lack the tech or they dont trust their tech after producing such high profile carriers and other gadgets

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## danger007

Sanchez said:


> We are rich dudes who would love to put every hooker under check. We buy Su-35s so that Russians would be too busy to take other customers like Indians...





Idiotic logic... shows immaturity levels is too high in you....


China has/have many project like J-10B,j-11B,J-15/16 and J-20 and J-31 some are rumored... going for Russian jets won't make any sense... either your projects are facing technical struggles or not upto required level...


----------



## Rajaraja Chola

SamranAli said:


> What about it?? Isnt china enemy?? Or it is friend now? If so then why china killer agni-v..? You guys cheated
> Russia won't arm India's enemies: Dmitry Rogozin - Economic Times



Its business. They can give it to whoever they want. They have given Su 27 and 30 before. So whats the problem now. 
The Super Sukhoi will be more than Su 35 anyway, thats y we never considered Su 35. 
Moreover i mentioned when will the chinese copy will be coming.


----------



## danger007

If china go shopping,that means they are having troubles while making 5th gen or remaining projects...


----------



## Sasquatch

The source of the article is russian there has not been a single government source just another rumor spread around.


----------



## jaiind

well that was awesome move by china to procure su 35,and later they will initiate their own indigenous super stealth fighter J 50 or some thing else.Russia is doing smart business with both India and china. arming both them with their hi tech fighters.
As a enthusiastic i have one question in my mind.china is developing their 5 gen fighters,and they said that they much superior than other counter parts.then what is the need to hurry for 4 gen su 35 fighters ??


----------



## Sasquatch

octopus said:


> Russia and China have clinched a preliminary agreement on the delivery of *48 Sukhoi Su-35BM* fighter jets to the Chinese air force, sources in Russia&#8217;s Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation said on Wednesday.The agreement worth *1.5 billion dollars* may add to the Su-35 foraying into international markets even though Russia&#8217;s cooperation with China in this field is fraught with substantial risks.
> 
> The Su-35BM is the modernized version of the T-10C platform that helped create the internationally distinguished Su-27 and Su-30 multi-role fighters. They have become the Russian-made warplanes of choice for foreign customers in the past twenty years.
> 
> Remarkably, it was China that contributed to the Su-27&#8217;s breakthrough into the global markets. Between 1991 and 1996, Moscow and Beijing signed a spate of deals on the delivery of the Su-27SK and Su-30MKK fighters to the Chinese air force. A total of 26 SU-27SKs were supplied to China at the time.
> 
> Shortly after, Russia inked similar agreements with India, Malaysia, Vietnam, Algeria and other countries. As for China, it *gradually started to copycat production of the Su-27, something that finally led to the creation of the J-11 fighter, a replica of the Su-27 plane*. Despite the fact that the J-11&#8217;s general characteristics yield to those of the Su-27, the very fact of copycatting added significantly to the development of China&#8217;s military aircraft industry and the modernization of the Chinese air force in the early 2000s.
> 
> As for the Su-35 fighters, Beijing has repeatedly signaled its readiness to purchase them from Russia, with the latter understandably seeking to prevent a potential copycat production of the Su-35 by China. In this regard, B*eijing will hardly guarantee the protection of copyrights on the production of Su-35, experts say, adding that the more such planes are delivered to China the less copycat-related risks Russia will face. At least 50 Su-35s should be supplied to China so that such risks can be resolved.*
> 
> Another option is to supply a simplified version of the Su-35 to China, something that analysts say may well be used in practice.
> 
> However, the only best way to avoid the Su-35 being copycatted is to reduce drastically the delivery of Russia&#8217;s high-tech military equipment to China in the near future. Compensating for potential loses would be possible with the help of domestic orders to this effect.
> 
> Russia and China reached preliminary agreement for 48 Su-35BMs | idrw.org




The Source of this is Russian, China has denied the purchase of the SU35 and there has not been a single government source that confirms this, if it is I will reopen the thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## shree835

Russia and china are finalizing deal for sale of 48 aircrafts of Sukhoi su 35, but many defence experts around the world are puzzled with Russian stupidity or just lack of business sense. China has a large fleet of Sukhoi su 30MKK and have reversed engineered older Sukhoi su 27K and have named them J-11.China had ordered 200 Sukhoi Su 27 but cancelled the order when 100 aircrafts were delivered and started manufacturing reversed engineered Sukhoi 27 with their own air frame modifications and also cracked Russian software on Sukhoi 27 to enable it to fire their own locally developed weapons systems.
Russia on the other hand made right noises, and Rosoboron export`s general manager Anatoli Isaykin in MAKS 2009 aero show said Russia will investigate the J-11B Chinese copy of Su-27 and Sukhoi was part of the process, no action and only talk, fuelled speculation of a secret deal between Russian and china on this matter, china was also able to make a reversed engineered Sukhoi 33 for its aircraft carrier without much noise from Russia.

No matter what level of technology was reversed by china, Russia only did lip service and continued supply of AL-31 engines to J-10 Program of China and never objected to resale of Russian built Klimov RD-93 engines to Pakistan for their JF-17 aircrafts.

Purchase of limited (48 Nos) by china is leading to speculation that its token order for reversed engineered aircrafts to be followed, J-10 has been dubbed in Chinese media has better aircraft then Sukhoi 30MKK and Sukhoi 27K, recent test flights of chinas two stealth fighters indicate that china might be shopping for new avionics and other systems (Ew, engines) for this aircrafts and what better then purchase of latest 4+++ gen fighter aircraft in form of Sukhoi su 35.

When it comes to India, Russia surely has a different attitude towards its intellectual property rights; India has been Purchasing Russian weapons for more than 5 decades now but not once has reversed engineered any of weapons but when it comes to TOT of its legally bidding transfers, Russia has always made India dance to its tune, prime examples are of refusal to give India TOT on T-90 Gun barrel where India is forced to use older Gun barrel of T-72 tanks , Even tires for IAFs Sukhoi Su 30MKI fleet comes from Russia , since they refuse India to source it from Indian companies .

India on the other hand funded many of the technology which are been used by their forces , prime examples are Mig-29K which was first ordered by Indian Navy and after production line was setup from Indian funds , Russian navy went ahead ordered Mig-29K for its own use, abandoning any further development of Sukhoi su33 , it current naval aircrafts . Russian air force also has ordered Sukhoi su 30SM which is a Variant based on Sukhoi su 30MKI which India had funded.

India even in Joint ventures like BrahMos had to complete with Russian systems hurting its export potential, India had to enter into Joint venture with Russia on key project like MTA and Pak-Fa on Russian terms, with limited or no contribution from Indian side, India needs to be careful when dealing with Russia now, Indian funded projects might find their way into its enemies hand.

Sukhoi 35 sales to China!!! Why Russia? | idrw.org


----------



## itaskol

crazy russia want to sell their su 35 every month.
we call it menstrual onset
48 can never be.
we only want 4.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

shree835 said:


> Russia and china are finalizing deal for sale of 48 aircrafts of Sukhoi su 35, but many defence experts around the world are puzzled with Russian stupidity or just lack of business sense. China has a large fleet of Sukhoi su 30MKK and have reversed engineered older Sukhoi su 27K and have named them J-11.China had ordered 200 Sukhoi Su 27 but cancelled the order when 100 aircrafts were delivered and started manufacturing reversed engineered Sukhoi 27 with their own air frame modifications and also cracked Russian software on Sukhoi 27 to enable it to fire their own locally developed weapons systems.
> Russia on the other hand made right noises, and Rosoboron export`s general manager Anatoli Isaykin in MAKS 2009 aero show said Russia will investigate the J-11B Chinese copy of Su-27 and Sukhoi was part of the process,* no action and only talk, fuelled speculation of a secret deal between Russian and china on this matter, china was also able to make a reversed engineered Sukhoi 33 for its aircraft carrier without much noise from Russia.
> 
> No matter what level of technology was reversed by china, Russia only did lip service and continued supply of AL-31 engines to J-10 Program of China and never objected to resale of Russian built Klimov RD-93 engines to Pakistan for their JF-17 aircrafts.*
> 
> Purchase of limited (48 Nos) by china is leading to speculation that its token order for reversed engineered aircrafts to be followed, J-10 has been dubbed in Chinese media has better aircraft then Sukhoi 30MKK and Sukhoi 27K, recent test flights of chinas two stealth fighters indicate that china might be shopping for new avionics and other systems (Ew, engines) for this aircrafts and what better then purchase of latest 4+++ gen fighter aircraft in form of Sukhoi su 35.
> 
> *When it comes to India, Russia surely has a different attitude towards its intellectual property rights; India has been Purchasing Russian weapons for more than 5 decades now but not once has reversed engineered any of weapons but when it comes to TOT of its legally bidding transfers, Russia has always made India dance to its tune, prime examples are of refusal to give India TOT on T-90 Gun barrel where India is forced to use older Gun barrel of T-72 tanks , Even tires for IAFs Sukhoi Su 30MKI fleet comes from Russia , since they refuse India to source it from Indian companies.*



Isn't it obvious why?

For the same reason why Russia chose to co-found the SCO with China, instead of India.

Because Russia knows that China can and will stand up to America, and we have been able to do it since the 1950 Korean War in which we pushed the USA + 16 of her allies completely out of North Korea.

But they have no such assurances when it comes to India. They can clearly see that India is trying to play both sides off each other for their benefit, and while that makes reasonable sense from India's point of view (fair enough), it still makes Russia feel uneasy.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Abingdonboy

So this is confirmation the J-20/31 are nothing but cool looking hollow shells?


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Abingdonboy said:


> So this is confirmation the J-20/31 are nothing but cool looking hollow shells?



You are free to believe what you want. 

We'll keep developing our two 5th generation fighters, while you guys develop your LCA.

May the best one win.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## itaskol

Abingdonboy said:


> So this is confirmation the J-20/31 are nothing but cool looking hollow shells?


what is this logic??
It is russia which announce every month that they will sell Su 35 to china.
and in some russia media even try to force china to buy their jet to balance their trade deficit.
and for some reason we also have to keep "good" relationship with russia.
maybe we will buy some to show our friendship to russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abingdonboy

Chinese-Dragon said:


> You are free to believe what you want.
> 
> We'll keep developing our two 5th generation fighters, while you guys develop your LCA.
> 
> May the best one win.



Mate, answer the Q. If China is able to indigeniously devlop 5th gen tech then there is no need for a 4.5+ gen fighter surely? If this deal is confirmed it means China isn't able to devlop such tech and the J-20/31 will have 4.5+ gen tech at best fitted there is no other logical conclusion you can draw from this news.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## itaskol

Abingdonboy said:


> Mate, answer the Q. If China is able to indigeniously devlop 5th gen tech then there is no need for a 4.5+ gen fighter surely? If this deal is confirmed it means China isn't able to devlop such tech and the J-20/31 will have 4.5+ gen tech at best fitted there is no other logical conclusion you can draw from this news.


why india buy rafael&#65311;

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## JonAsad

Abingdonboy said:


> So this is confirmation the J-20/31 are nothing but cool looking hollow shells?



J20?- the article does not even mentioned it and you came to a conclusion?-

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Abingdonboy said:


> Mate, answer the Q. If China is able to indigeniously devlop 5th gen tech then there is no need for a 4.5+ gen fighter surely? If this deal is confirmed it means China isn't able to devlop such tech and the J-20/31 will have 4.5+ gen tech at best fitted there is no other logical conclusion you can draw from this news.



Your logic is impeccable. 

So if a country can produce electronics on there own, there is no need to import any?

Why does India import everything, even basic ammunition? Does that prove they can't make it themselves?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## JonAsad

itaskol said:


> why india buy rafael&#65311;



They should invest in LCA-

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Water Car Engineer

Abingdonboy said:


> So this is confirmation the J-20/31 are nothing but cool looking hollow shells?



Not at all.

Why would China even buy the 35? They want to be pretty much totally independent in the defense industry.



Chinese-Dragon said:


> Your logic is impeccable.
> 
> So if a country can produce electronics on there own, there is no need to import any?
> 
> Why does India import everything, even basic ammunition? Does that prove they can't make it themselves?



I dont get India sometimes.

They can make ICBM, Nuke subs, attack helicopters, etc, etc, etc, but they want to import a gun?

They CAN do this, but something is defective in the system.


----------



## Abingdonboy

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Your logic is impeccable.
> 
> So if a country can produce electronics on there own, there is no need to import any?
> 
> Why does India import everything, even basic ammunition? Does that prove they can't make it themselves?


Pretty much- India can't build a fighter as capable as the Rafale right now this is a a FACT.Same seems to be true of China now.


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Abingdonboy said:


> Pretty much- India can't build a fighter as capable as the Rafale right now this is a a FACT.Same seems to be true of China now.



Your logic failed pretty hard here.

Like I said, importing something is not proof of the inability to make it. India should know this better than most, given that they import almost everything. Down to basic ammunition.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SpArK

itaskol said:


> why india buy rafael&#65311;



There was a festive season discount offer. 

Also 2 year service warranty.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## itaskol

Water Car Engineer said:


> Not at all.
> 
> Why would China even buy the 35? They want to be pretty much totally independent in the defense industry.


for some reason we also have to keep "good" relationship with russia.
maybe we will buy some to show our friendship to russia.

funny thing is:
russia media announce the su35 deal monthly.
chinese media always stay low-profile.
and india media worry about that russia sell su 35 to china.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

Abingdonboy said:


> So this is confirmation the J-20/31 are nothing but cool looking hollow shells?


Don't be so mad man, you seem to be unsecure. I know where is your soft touch. We have state of art J20 and we love Su35, what's your business. These Su35 will be serving as study platform and opposing force in the drill. Dont forget Russian promot Su35 to Vietnam and Malaysia as well. India wanna get some?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Water Car Engineer

itaskol said:


> for some reason we also have to keep "good" relationship with russia.
> maybe we will buy some to show our friendship to russia.
> 
> funny thing is:
> russia media announce the su35 deal monthly.
> chinese media always stay low-profile.
> *and india media worry about that russia sell su 35 to china.*



Indian media finds something to talk about all the time.


----------



## 帅的一匹

itaskol said:


> for some reason we also have to keep "good" relationship with russia.
> maybe we will buy some to show our friendship to russia.
> 
> funny thing is:
> russia media announce the su35 deal monthly.
> chinese media always stay low-profile.
> and india media worry about that russia sell su 35 to china.


I mean its only cost China 1.5 billions with 24 units, why not?

Damn cheap

Seem Indian forget China's purchasing power.......


----------



## seven7seven

I'm not fully convinced this story is true yet as there has been no official statement from the Chinese about this deal. All the noise seems to be coming from the Russians so maybe it's Russia's way of trying to generate interest in the Su-35 for other export markets. Not saying it's not true but until both sides confirm the deal, it just seems like more hot air as the Russians have claimed deals for the Su-35, with China, before, that came to nothing.

If true, I can see why China may want these fighters as training tools for their indigenous aircrafts and pilots to pit themselves against Russia's best current fighter jet. Also, many seem to write off 4th Gen and 4.5+ Gen as obsolete because airforces around the World are now starting to acquire 5th Gen fighters, but many military aviation experts, including those within the US Air Force, think that having a 5th Gen-only procurement policy of new fighters is an unbalanced and flawed strategy. Whilst stealth fighters, like the F-22, are no doubt the most sophisticated and best fighters available, they also come with considerable shortcomings with regards to aspects such as payload and range of operation, in addition to their prohibitive costs to make and maintain. There are growing supporters within the USAF to concurrently acquire 5th Gen fighters like the F-35 along with new 4.5+ Gen fighters to replace the many fatigued 4th Gen fighters that the US are using at the moment.

Getting back to China's potential purchase of the Su-35s, I think China might be taking the pragmatic move of acquiring the best 4.5+ Gen planes they can get hold of to train their pilots against. At the same time they will be perfecting their 5th Gen J-20 and J-31 platforms until they become matured, at which time they will probably be fielded along with these Su-35s along with their other indigenous 4th and 4,5 Gen planes.

In agreeing to sell the Su-35 to China, I think Russia are accepting that with or without their help, China will develop whatever technologies Russia currently possess sooner or later, so they may as well cash in now. China are closing in fast on the Russians and I can see within a decade that China and Russia will enter into many joint ventures as true partners and peers. 

With regards to the article in the original post, I don't think any possible sale of the Su-35 has anything to do with India. I don't it's a case of Russia stabbing India in the back as China are also Russia's ally so they have every right to sell them to China. Whilst China have ongoing land border disputes with India, neither country are likely going to antagonise each other anytime soon to provoke conflict of any sort. India and China depend too much on each other for trade and have too much to lose if war broke out. Ultimately, China's military build-up is not aimed at countering India but it is the US's Asia-Pacific pivot that China is looking to prepare for. India no doubt play an important element in this equation but mutual economic interests of India and China, and the US too, will ensure all sides play nice, despite all the Cold War-like rhetoric.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## itaskol

wanglaokan said:


> I mean its only cost China 1.5 billions with 24 units, why not?
> 
> Damn cheap



The problem is, we dont want 24.
buy max. 12 is enough to show our friendship to russia.


----------



## Sasquatch

Already posted and the source of this article is Russian, not an single government source has even confirmed this news not mention the fact if China was buying the Su35 there would no need on building the J-11B and J-16.


----------



## 帅的一匹

itaskol said:


> The problem is, we dont want 24.
> buy max. 12 is enough to show our friendship to russia.


I have internal source, my brother is serving in PLAAF high ranking service. 24 done!


----------



## SpArK

itaskol said:


> The problem is, we dont want 24.
> buy max. 12 is enough to show our friendship to russia.



I think u should buy 1 of each fighter Russia has and 1 of each helicopters to show friendship. Good idea.


----------



## itaskol

wanglaokan said:


> I have internal source, my brother is serving in PLAAF high ranking service. 24 done!



and 1.5 billion for 24 is cheap??


----------



## 帅的一匹

Hu Songshan said:


> Already posted and the source of this article is Russian, not an single government source has even confirmed this news not mention the fact if China was buying the Su35 there would no need on building the J-11 and J-16.


Su-35 is a far superior platform than J11b, the radar, engine, the firepower. Sorry i am not agree with you on this point.


----------



## itaskol

SpArK said:


> I think u should buy 1 of each fighter Russia has and 1 of each helicopters to show friendship. Good idea.


russia are not stupid....
same to the su33. they dont want to sell china their jets in very limited quantity.


----------



## Abingdonboy

Chinese-Dragon said:


> Your logic failed pretty hard here.
> 
> Like I said, importing something is not proof of the inability to make it. India should know this better than most, given that they import almost everything. Down to basic ammunition.



Yeah okay. I'm off to bed now- we'll argue some more tomorow.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sasquatch

wanglaokan said:


> Su-35 is a far superior platform than J11b, the radar, engine, the firepower. Sorry i am not agree with you on this point.



Thats not the point there would be no need to build the J-11B or J-16 if we were going to buy the Su35 the only sources I find on this is Russian so I am skeptical.

Airshow China 2006 airshow
Russia's Sukhoi markets new multi-role fighter at Chinese air show
Ria Novosti,Russia ^ | 31/ 10/ 2006
*ttp://en.rian.ru/russia/20061031/55256972.html 

Airshow China 2008 airshow
..corresponding department confirmed that negotiations with China regarding Su-35 have been conducted..
*ttp://www.kommersant.com/p895011/The_first_visit_of_President_Medvedev_to_China/
*ttp://trishulgroup.blogspot.com.au/2008/11/airshow-china-2009-first-impressions.html[/QUOTE]

Airshow China 2010
Russia ready to sell Su-35 fighter jets to China
*ttp://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20101116/161359301.html

5 months ago, 2012
Russia Close to Sign Su-35 Fighter Deal With China
*ttp://en.rian.ru/world/20120306/171780246.html

Airshow china 2012

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## itaskol

wanglaokan said:


> Su-35 is a far superior platform than J11b, the radar, engine, the firepower. Sorry i am not agree with you on this point.



far superior than J11B,( it is for sure&#65289;

but SAC also developing J16. buy Su 35 can damage the developing of J16.

24 is too many. and 1.5billion is not cheap at all.
it means over 60 million each.


----------



## 帅的一匹

Hu Songshan said:


> Thats not the point there would be no need to build the J-11B or J-16 if we were going to buy the Su35 the only sources I find on this is Russian so I am skeptical.
> 
> Airshow China 2006 airshow
> Russia's Sukhoi markets new multi-role fighter at Chinese air show
> Ria Novosti,Russia ^ | 31/ 10/ 2006
> *ttp://en.rian.ru/russia/20061031/55256972.html
> 
> Airshow China 2008 airshow
> ..corresponding department confirmed that negotiations with China regarding Su-35 have been conducted..
> *ttp://www.kommersant.com/p895011/The_first_visit_of_President_Medvedev_to_China/
> *ttp://trishulgroup.blogspot.com.au/2008/11/airshow-china-2009-first-impressions.html



Airshow China 2010
Russia ready to sell Su-35 fighter jets to China
*ttp://en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20101116/161359301.html

5 months ago, 2012
Russia Close to Sign Su-35 Fighter Deal With China
*ttp://en.rian.ru/world/20120306/171780246.html

Airshow china 2012[/QUOTE]

Russia is really worried China will reverse engineering Su35, so it seemed contradictory when deal with China on Su35. One side, Russia wanna reexploit China military market by high end tech like Su35, on the other it was afraid of the product being reversed. Now Russia made his mind to sell it China, why China refuse the proposal. We can get the tech of F117S TV ENGINE!! The engine is our Archlies heel until you see WS10A and WS15 are installed on our single engine in PLAAF service rather than duo ones like J11b. We should respect the Russian Aviation tech, but try hard to invest in self-reliance R&D! Maybe J20 is far superior than Su35, but Su 35 will definitely give China some epiphany! &#20013;&#22269;&#33322;&#31354;&#19994;&#30340;&#21457;&#23637;&#35201;&#20004;&#26465;&#33151;&#36208;&#36335;. &#19968;&#36793;&#19979;&#22823;&#21147;&#27668;&#30740;&#21457;&#65292;&#19968;&#36793;&#36141;&#20080;&#23545;&#33258;&#24049;&#33322;&#31354;&#24037;&#19994;&#25104;&#38271;&#26377;&#30410;&#30340;&#20135;&#21697;&#36827;&#34892;&#36870;&#21521;&#24037;&#31243;&#12290;


----------



## Sasquatch

To many threads on this so I will just merge with the other speculation thread and reopen it if the government sources confirms otherwise just more rumors.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yeti

TAIPEI  Though not in the bag yet, defense industry analysts and sources in Moscow have confirmed that Beijing and Moscow are negotiating the first Russian export sale of the twin-engine Sukhoi Su-35 multi-role fighter.

If the deal goes forward, Chinas fighter capabilities become much greater and the military challenge to regional powers increases. The Su-35s Saturn engines give it a unique supermaneuverability capability.

The principle hurdle has been overcome, said a U.S. defense analyst. Russia has just caved-in to demands by China to reduce the initial procurement from 48 fighters to 24 fighters.

The negotiations on price and other conditions of this deal will take place the next year, said Vasiliy Kashin, a researcher at the Moscow-based Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST). Such negotiations can also be quite difficult. The contract, I think, is not likely before 2014.

During the 2012 Airshow China (Zhuhai Airshow) in mid-November, Russias RT media outlet quoted Mikhail Pogosyan, president of the United Aircraft Corporation, confirming Chinas interest in the Su-35.

The Chinese are showing interest in this jet. But we have agreements that we disclose information only upon reaching actual agreements. So, I am not going to comment on the pace of negotiations, Pogosyan told RT. He also promised the Su-35 would be present at the next Zhuhai Airshow in 2014.

Russias new defense minister, Sergei Shoigu, visited China in mid-November and met with Hu Jintao, Chinas outgoing president and chairman of the Central Military Commission (CMC). Whether a Russian deal with the current members of the Politburo and the CMC will survive the March turnover of leadership to a new crop of Chinese leaders remains to be seen.

There are fears China will only procure 24 fighters with the intention of reverse engineering and copying the fighter, as they did with the Su-27SK.

In 1995, China secured a production license to build 200 Su-27SKs, dubbed the J-11A, for $2.5 billion from the Shenyang Aircraft Corp. In 2006, Russia cancelled the deal after 95 aircraft when it discovered China had reverse engineered the aircraft and was secretly producing an indigenous copy, the J-11B, with Chinese-built avionics and weapons.

There are also suspicions China will only want the Su-35 engine for the twin-engine Chengdu J-20 stealth fighter. The engine in the Su-35 and the T-50 is the Saturn AL-117S, which is an upgraded variant of the AL-31FN. China already imports the AL-31FN from Russia for the single-engine Chengdu J-10 fighter.

If they procure one spare for every four installed [on Chinas Su-35], which you dont really need, then thats a warning sign, said the U.S. source. There is no fixed ratio for spare engines to installed engines [for the deal] at this time.

Despite all the obvious bear traps stepped into during the J-11 disaster, the Russian aviation industry needs money and must keep its fighter production line moving. If it stalls out and the T-50 fighter does not come online as scheduled, then the Russian air force will need them [Su-27/MiG-29], he said.

The Sukhoi T-50 is the prototype for the PAK FA stealth fighter, intended to replace the Russian air forces Su-27 and MiG-29 fighters. Delays and problems in the U.S. F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program are a nagging reminder that glitches can occur in fifth generation fighter programs.

The question of whether the Chinese procure more then just 24 Su-35s is complicated, Kashin said.

The key question is if the Chinese can apply the Su-35 technology to their J-11B family aircraft. If the difference between these two types is big enough, than they cannot absorb that technology quickly and there is the possibility that they will evaluate the Su-35 and then buy additional number of them, he said.

Kashin said the first batch of Chinese procured Su-27SK fighters in 1992 was for only 26 aircraft. If they like it and if the J-11B project is not going smoothly, than they can buy more, or buy the license to build the Su-35 in China.

The J-11B program is in big trouble; the Chinese have lost a lot of aircraft in crashes, said the U.S. source. They have also reached a technological plateau and need help going to the next step beyond the Su-27/J-11.

No country has procured the Su-35 before, though Brazil, India and South Korea have considered it. China has shown an interest in the Su-33 carrier-borne fighter and the Su-35 before, but previous problems with intellectual property rights infringement with the Su-27 burned Russian arms merchants  that is until now.


Is China Buying Russia&#8217;s Su-35 Fighter? | Defense News | defensenews.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lmjiao

Only one word: NEVER


----------



## Beast

From what I gather, China buy Su-35 is for PAF.... China comes to an agreement with Russia not to export any of their J-11 flanker series. Su-35 after being bought by China will be re-export to PAF. In this way, Russia will not bear any responsible of export any arms to Pakistan and fulfill it promise to India of not exporting any arms to Pakistan.

PAF while will have deep strike fighter capable of bombing deep into India.


----------



## jhungary

Beast said:


> From what I gather, China buy Su-35 is for PAF.... China comes to an agreement with Russia not to export any of their J-11 flanker series. Su-35 after being bought by China will be re-export to PAF. In this way, Russia will not bear any responsible of export any arms to Pakistan and fulfill it promise to India of not exporting any arms to Pakistan.
> 
> PAF while will have deep strike fighter capable of bombing deep into India.



You cannot transfer Russian Arms to Pakistan without Russia authorisation......Even tho Chinese bought them, they still need the Russian to say it's ok to pipe them down to another country.

You can, however, reverse engineering them and sold them to pakistan.


----------



## BigDaddyWatch

My friend i have stop reading the article after the first lines.



> Though not in the bag yet, defense industry *analysts and sources in Moscow have confirmed* that Beijing and Moscow are negotiating the first Russian export sale of the twin-engine Sukhoi Su-35 multi-role fighter.



Another Russian fairytale.


----------



## Mahabali

Beast said:


> From what I gather, China buy Su-35 is for PAF.... China comes to an agreement with Russia not to export any of their J-11 flanker series. Su-35 after being bought by China will be re-export to PAF. In this way, Russia will not bear any responsible of export any arms to Pakistan and fulfill it promise to India of not exporting any arms to Pakistan.
> 
> PAF while will have deep strike fighter capable of bombing deep into India.



SU-35 with PAF or chinese airforce India should be wary of ...any way it is not more potent than the stockplie of nuclear missiles both countries already have.

If China pays hard cash they can buy any thing in the world as no one can stop them least of all India Russia friendship.

In face of such dangers India will not get dissolved as a nation but should have to have a decent ability to reciprocate any misadventure and I have no doubt in the intention and the resolve of Indian govt in doing that.

Chinese friends should understand we have been dealing with our friendly neibghour for last 65 years and have factored that pain in all our decisions by providing a new toy it is not going to increase the pain factor in any way.


----------



## Beast

jhungary said:


> You cannot transfer Russian Arms to Pakistan without Russia authorisation......Even tho Chinese bought them, they still need the Russian to say it's ok to pipe them down to another country.
> 
> You can, however, reverse engineering them and sold them to pakistan.



Have you heard of RD-93 engine Saga?



Mahabali said:


> SU-35 with PAF or chinese airforce India should be wary of ...any way it is not more potent than the stockplie of nuclear missiles both countries already have.
> 
> If China pays hard cash they can buy any thing in the world as no one can stop them least of all India Russia friendship.
> 
> In face of such dangers India will not get dissolved as a nation but should have to have a decent ability to reciprocate any misadventure and I have no doubt in the intention and the resolve of Indian govt in doing that.
> 
> Chinese friends should understand we have been dealing with our friendly neibghour for last 65 years and have factored that pain in all our decisions by providing a new toy it is not going to increase the pain factor in any way.



That means India will not make noises? That's good.


----------



## jhungary

Beast said:


> Have you heard of RD-93 engine Saga?
> 
> 
> 
> That means India will not make noises? That's good.



Dude, RD-93 is a different time, the legal ownership of that technology is "Soviet Russia" which no longer exists.
and Russia permit Chinese sold of Such engine to Pakistan

Russia to Permit Chinese Sale of RD-93 Fighter Jet Engines to Pakistan | India Defence



> 2007-04-26 In what could cause concern to India, Russia has reportedly permitted China to re-export its RD-93 fighter engines to Pakistan.



try selling a Su-35 without Russia Permit and you will know what is Lawyer power "from Russia with love"


----------



## Jade

It means all J-10, J-11, J-12,J-13....., all bombed


----------



## Beast

jhungary said:


> Dude, RD-93 is a different time, the legal ownership of that technology is "Soviet Russia" which no longer exists.
> and Russia permit Chinese sold of Such engine to Pakistan
> 
> Russia to Permit Chinese Sale of RD-93 Fighter Jet Engines to Pakistan | India Defence
> 
> 
> 
> try selling a Su-35 without Russia Permit and you will know what is Lawyer power "from Russia with love"



You seriously think China transfer Su-35 to PAF is just 2 country agreement? 
Think about it. Russia try to sell Su-35 and so far has not found even a single customer. Even its most likely destinated customer ,India reject Su-35 sales. The Russia Bear is desperate. Su-35 needs a foreign customer. China has its J-11 series fighter and even the most recent J-15 demonstrate its abilities landed on Liaoning CV. Why would China be interested in Su-35 when it even has J-20 , J-31 full stealth fighter in program and ready to be delivered in few years time. If China bought it, the only reason will be transfer it to PAF who needs a heavy weight fighter long range fighter.. 

Russian just act dumb and allow that to happen. Just like RD-93 engine. In this way, it can answer to India while at the same time, kick start its first Su-35 foreign sales.


----------



## Yeti

&#8220;The J-11B program is in big trouble; the Chinese have *lost a lot of aircraft in crashes*,&#8221; said the U.S. source. &#8220;They have also reached a technological plateau and need help going to the next step beyond the Su-27/J-11.&#8221;


This is intresting as China is known to hide it's aircraft crashes


----------



## Kompromat

Discussed before..

Closed.


----------



## BlueDot_in_Space

*Purchase of 24 Su-35s from Russia could be due to problems in developing suitable technology for China's own J-20, analysts say*


A preliminary deal for the sale of 24 advanced Russian Su-35 jet fighters to the People's Liberation Army indicates the technological hurdles China faces in developing its own J-20, especially in terms of engine technology, military analysts say.

Mainland and Russian media reported last month that Beijing might purchase 24 Su-35s, an updated version of the fourth generation Su-27, for US$1.5 billion. The deal was first proposed by Moscow two years ago.

Beijing expressed interest in purchasing only four Su-35s last year, but that was rejected by Moscow, which had originally expected China to buy 48 planes, Moscow's Vedomosti business daily quoted an official from Russia's Federal Service for Military and Technical Co-operation as saying.

It also quoted Igor Korotchenko, head of the Russian Defence Ministry's public council, as saying *Moscow also asked Beijing to sign an agreement not to make copies of the Su-35.*

*A Beijing-based PLA senior colonel, who requested anonymity, said: "We decided to buy the Su-35 because it's a fact that our home-made engines have failed to measure up to the Russian products."*

*He said China was still playing catch-up, despite recent headlines hailing its progress on military modernisation.*

*"Engines have been the biggest headache and we are still trying to cope with it," he said. "The purchase of the Su-35s might help our J-20 project, but there are too many deeper problems hiding in our military industrial system that are hindering our research and development."*

Andrei Chang, editor-in-chief of the Canadian-based Kanwa Defence Review, said* the possible Su-35 deal was aimed at obtaining 117S engines, the most advanced Russian engine installed in a single-seat, twin-engined fighter. "Beijing wants the engine [of the Su-35]&#8230; because their J-20 project failed to solve the most challenging part - the engine,*" Chang said.

The J-20, China's first stealth fighter, was unveiled early last year. Photographs posted on the internet by mainland military enthusiasts show the J-20 prototype has a stealth body shape similar to the American F-22 and F-35, with a hint of the Russian Su-27 in its turbofan engines. Military experts at home and overseas do not expect the J-20 to enter service until 2018 because of the engine problem.

Beijing's earlier expression of interest in purchasing only four Su-35s was rejected by Russia because of copycat concerns, the Moscow Times reported.

"Beijing compromised on the size of [the Su-35 deal] &#8230; because they think 24 is an acceptable negotiation quantity, while Moscow feels it is worth considering," Chang said.

The deal could also give a much-needed boost to Russia's military industry, which desperately needs China's business because formerly stalwart customers are proving less reliable.

"The Russian side has found their Su-35 production line lacks enough orders to [reduce unit cost and make it a profitable project]," Chang said.

"Russia originally expected some sales to Libya, who promised to order some [Su-35] jets under Muammar Gaddafi's administration, while Venezuela also planned to place orders," he said. "But both have now backtracked on those promises due to political upheaval at home." However, the export of Su-35s to China has stirred up a heated debate among Russian defence industry enterprises and military officials, with opponents to the deal highlighting China's history of copying Russian weapons, Chang said.

*China has long been producing unauthorised copies of the Russian Su-27 - as the Jian-11. It has also designed a two-seat fighter bomber version (the Jian-16) and a stealth version (the Jian-17), and obtained an aircraft-carrier-based version of the Su-30 from Ukraine to produce the Jian-15.

But Beijing insists they are all indigenous designs that just happen to bear some resemblance to Russian fighters.*

"I think the Su-35 deal will be submitted to the Kremlin to make the final decision," Chang said, adding there was still a long way to go before a final deal was signed.

"China and Russia have just signed a memorandum this year, meaning both sides have yet to decide on the deal because they need further rounds of negotiation and discussion involving prices, which models of Su-35 will be exported, what kinds of weapons systems will be involved in the deal, technology transfer and other details."

PLA signs preliminary deal for 24 Russian Su-35 jet fighters | South China Morning Post

Hmmmmmmmmmm........

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

good news.


----------



## S10

Aren't you people tired of posting the same crap over and over again since 2008? Every couple of weeks China "orders Su-35". I guess China must have hundreds of them by now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## scholseys

Lol beijing based colonel. This news sounds made up through and through.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Beast

This 24 Su-35 will be transfer to PAF if purchased... The. PAF will have heavy load , long range deep strike into heart of India.
With AESA and 117S, this will be more superior than MKI.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## veekysingh

aazidane said:


> Lol beijing based colonel. This news sounds made up through and through.



its a china based website.



Beast said:


> This 24 Su-35 will be transfer to PAF if purchased... The. PAF will have heavy load , long range deep strike into heart of India.
> With AESA and 117S, this will be more superior than MKI.



why this off topic trolling?


----------



## veekysingh

a technical question why china need 117s? 117s prduces wet thrust of 142kn, as per chinese data ws-10a produce wet thrust of 132kn. but then j-20 weigh less then PAKFA . so why china need a high thrust engine?


----------



## scholseys

veekysingh said:


> its a china based website.
> 
> 
> 
> why this off topic trolling?



All newspapers have an agenda, if this news was credible then they would have named this beijing based colonel.


----------



## veekysingh

aazidane said:


> All newspapers have an agenda, if this news was credible then they would have named this beijing based colonel.



buddy we are talking about chinese news paper , not indian or pakistani media who talk free.


----------



## S10

veekysingh said:


> a technical question why china need 117s? 117s prduces wet thrust of 142kn, as per chinese data ws-10a produce wet thrust of 132kn. but then j-20 weigh less then PAKFA . so why china need a high thrust engine?


WS-10A is rated at 125kn, same as AL-31FN according to offical data from Zhuhai Airshow this year. 117S or 99M2 would provide China with the engines it needs to power J-20 and J-31.



veekysingh said:


> buddy we are talking about chinese news paper , not indian or pakistani media who talk free.


There are dozens of second rate news sources in China, no more professional than rumour mills.


----------



## Secur

How many times would you keep signing the deal , volunteers ?


----------



## Beast

veekysingh said:


> its a china based website.
> 
> 
> 
> why this off topic trolling?



What troll? With J-31 and J-20, why would we buy Russian Su-35? Only reason will be transferring to PAF since China has signed pact with Russian not to export any of our own made flanker series.


----------



## veekysingh

Beast said:


> What troll? With J-31 and J-20, why would we buy Russian Su-35? Only reason will be transferring to PAF since China has signed pact with Russian not to export any of our own made flanker series.



 oh dude. i cant argue with you. keep it up


----------



## 帅的一匹

Serve in the opposition force of PLAAF.


----------



## qwerrty

i could be true. this is nothing. china forex is adding several billion dollars in a week..lo


----------



## Globenim

The article was likely provided by a Russian source directly or trough middlemen to the Hong Kong based reporter. And as usual no confirming sources from China. "Anonymous colonel".... Seriously.

The already prepared the usual bullshit of excuses to retract the news
"Moscow also asked Beijing to sign an agreement not to make copies of the Su-35."
"will be submitted to the Kremlin to make the final decision"

Give it the usual two or three weeks and the Russians will "decline" Chinas "interest" and "request" for Su-35 yet again. And the usual monkeys go apeshit about "hurr proof China copycat" instead of "hurr proof China incompetent like us!"


----------



## jhungary

Beast said:


> This 24 Su-35 will be transfer to PAF if purchased... The. PAF will have heavy load , long range deep strike into heart of India.
> With AESA and 117S, this will be more superior than MKI.



didn't i told you you cannot transfer Russia tech without Russian Authorisation??

Unless mr putin said yes, you cannot go resell the planes to Pakistan. Unless you expect a big lawsuit. And no, Russia will not sweep it under the table.


----------



## danger007

hahahaha so my doubt is right... so what about J-31,16 ......


----------



## Sasquatch

This is a hong kong article as mentioned with a russian source not a single report from Chinese(mainland sites) where if this deal were true it would be reported on sites like Chinese Daily etc etc unless there is an official source don't post the same news


----------



## Arzamas 16

A preliminary deal for the sale of 24 advanced Russian Su-35 jet fighters to the People's Liberation Army indicates the technological hurdles China faces in developing its own J-20, especially in terms of engine technology, military analysts say.

Mainland and Russian media reported last month that Beijing might purchase 24 Su-35s, an updated version of the fourth generation Su-27, for US$1.5 billion. The deal was first proposed by Moscow two years ago.

Beijing expressed interest in purchasing only four Su-35s last year, but that was rejected by Moscow, which had originally expected China to buy 48 planes, Moscow's Vedomosti business daily quoted an official from Russia's Federal Service for Military and Technical Co-operation as saying.

It also quoted Igor Korotchenko, head of the Russian Defence Ministry's public council, as saying Moscow also asked Beijing to sign an agreement not to make copies of the Su-35.

A Beijing-based PLA senior colonel, who requested anonymity, said: "We decided to buy the Su-35 because it's a fact that our home-made engines have failed to measure up to the Russian products."

He said China was still playing catch-up, despite recent headlines hailing its progress on military modernisation.

"Engines have been the biggest headache and we are still trying to cope with it," he said. "The purchase of the Su-35s might help our J-20 project, but there are too many deeper problems hiding in our military industrial system that are hindering our research and development."

Andrei Chang, editor-in-chief of the Canadian-based Kanwa Defence Review, said the possible Su-35 deal was aimed at obtaining 117S engines, the most advanced Russian engine installed in a single-seat, twin-engined fighter. "Beijing wants the engine [of the Su-35] *because their J-20 project failed to solve the most challenging part - the engine," Chang said.*

The J-20, China's first stealth fighter, was unveiled early last year. Photographs posted on the internet by mainland military enthusiasts show the J-20 prototype has a stealth body shape similar to the American F-22 and F-35, with a hint of the Russian Su-27 in its turbofan engines. Military experts at home and overseas do not expect the J-20 to enter service until 2018 because of the engine problem.

Beijing's earlier expression of interest in purchasing only four Su-35s was rejected by Russia because of copycat concerns, the Moscow Times reported.

"Beijing compromised on the size of [the Su-35 deal]  because they think 24 is an acceptable negotiation quantity, while Moscow feels it is worth considering," Chang said.

The deal could also give a much-needed boost to Russia's military industry, which desperately needs China's business because formerly stalwart customers are proving less reliable.

"The Russian side has found their Su-35 production line lacks enough orders to [reduce unit cost and make it a profitable project]," Chang said.

"Russia originally expected some sales to Libya, who promised to order some [Su-35] jets under Muammar Gaddafi's administration, while Venezuela also planned to place orders," he said. "But both have now backtracked on those promises due to political upheaval at home." However, the export of Su-35s to China has stirred up a heated debate among Russian defence industry enterprises and military officials, with opponents to the deal highlighting China's history of copying Russian weapons, Chang said.

China has long been producing unauthorised copies of the Russian Su-27 - as the Jian-11. It has also designed a two-seat fighter bomber version (the Jian-16) and a stealth version (the Jian-17), and obtained an aircraft-carrier-based version of the Su-30 from Ukraine to produce the Jian-15.

But Beijing insists they are all indigenous designs that just happen to bear some resemblance to Russian fighters.

*"I think the Su-35 deal will be submitted to the Kremlin to make the final decision," Chang said, adding there was still a long way to go before a final deal was signed.
*

*"China and Russia have just signed a memorandum this year, meaning both sides have yet to decide on the deal because they need further rounds of negotiation and discussion involving prices, which models of Su-35 will be exported, what kinds of weapons systems will be involved in the deal, technology transfer and other details." 
*

PLA signs preliminary deal for 24 Russian Su-35 jet fighters | South China Morning Post 


Final deal is yet to be singed, even if it singed next year 2016 is earliest delivery date since VVS get priority.


----------



## danger007

A preliminary deal for the sale of 24 advanced Russian Su-35 jet fighters to the People&#8217;s Liberation Army indicates the technological hurdles China faces in developing its own J-20, especially in terms of engine technology, military analysts say.

Mainland and Russian media reported last month that Beijing might purchase 24 Su-35s, an updated version of the fourth generation Su-27, for US$1.5 billion. The deal was first proposed by Moscow two years ago.

Beijing expressed interest in purchasing only four Su-35s last year, but that was rejected by Moscow, which had originally expected China to buy 48 planes, Moscow&#8217;s Vedomosti business daily quoted an official from Russia&#8217;s Federal Service for Military and Technical Co-operation as saying.

It also quoted Igor Korotchenko, head of the Russian Defence Ministry&#8217;s public council, as saying Moscow also asked Beijing to sign an agreement not to make copies of the Su-35.

A Beijing-based PLA senior colonel, who requested anonymity, said: &#8220;We decided to buy the Su-35 because it&#8217;s a fact that our home-made engines have failed to measure up to the Russian products.&#8221;

He said China was still playing catch-up, despite recent headlines hailing its progress on military modernisation.

&#8220;Engines have been the biggest headache and we are still trying to cope with it,&#8221; he said. &#8220;The purchase of the Su-35s might help our J-20 project, but there are too many deeper problems hiding in our military industrial system that are hindering our research and development.&#8221;

Andrei Chang, editor-in-chief of the Canadian-based Kanwa Defence Review, said the possible Su-35 deal was aimed at obtaining 117S engines, the most advanced Russian engine installed in a single-seat, twin-engined fighter. &#8220;Beijing wants the engine [of the Su-35]&#8230; because their J-20 project failed to solve the most challenging part &#8211; the engine,&#8221; Chang said.

The J-20, China&#8217;s first stealth fighter, was unveiled early last year. Photographs posted on the internet by mainland military enthusiasts show the J-20 prototype has a stealth body shape similar to the American F-22 and F-35, with a hint of the Russian Su-27 in its turbofan engines. Military experts at home and overseas do not expect the J-20 to enter service until 2018 because of the engine problem.

Beijing&#8217;s earlier expression of interest in purchasing only four Su-35s was rejected by Russia because of copycat concerns, the Moscow Times reported.

&#8220;Beijing compromised on the size of [the Su-35 deal] &#8230; because they think 24 is an acceptable negotiation quantity, while Moscow feels it is worth considering,&#8221; Chang said.

The deal could also give a much-needed boost to Russia&#8217;s military industry, which desperately needs China&#8217;s business because formerly stalwart customers are proving less reliable.

&#8220;The Russian side has found their Su-35 production line lacks enough orders to [reduce unit cost and make it a profitable project],&#8221; Chang said.

&#8220;Russia originally expected some sales to Libya, who promised to order some [Su-35] jets under Muammar Gaddafi&#8216;s administration, while Venezuela also planned to place orders,&#8221; he said. &#8220;But both have now backtracked on those promises due to political upheaval at home.&#8221; However, the export of Su-35s to China has stirred up a heated debate among Russian defence industry enterprises and military officials, with opponents to the deal highlighting China&#8217;s history of copying Russian weapons, Chang said.

China has long been producing unauthorised copies of the Russian Su-27 &#8211; as the Jian-11. It has also designed a two-seat fighter bomber version (the Jian-16) and a stealth version (the Jian-17), and obtained an aircraft-carrier-based version of the Su-30 from Ukraine to produce the Jian-15.

But Beijing insists they are all indigenous designs that just happen to bear some resemblance to Russian fighters.

&#8220;I think the Su-35 deal will be submitted to the Kremlin to make the final decision,&#8221; Chang said, adding there was still a long way to go before a final deal was signed.

&#8220;China and Russia have just signed a memorandum this year, meaning both sides have yet to decide on the deal because they need further rounds of negotiation and discussion involving prices, which models of Su-35 will be exported, what kinds of weapons systems will be involved in the deal, technology transfer and other details.&#8221;

http://chinadailymail.com/2012/12/0...inary-deal-for-24-russian-su-35-jet-fighters/

Thread with proper source not russians but chinese.... i don't see necessity of removing it or closing the thread...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sweetgrape

I find the article is from South China Morning Post, it is Hongkong, of course, it is also chinese, but you know Hongkong and Mainland have different report system, Hongkong paper had make many such kind of report, some are right, some are wrong.


I know what you want, you indian post such news from anywhere one by one, about SU-35, there were too much threads you indian post, before china government officially comfirm it, do not post more, then we argum on it, that time you indian can mock china as you can.

*About the thread, I suggest it should be closed, if the news be confirmed by china officially, it could be reopen, otherwise, we jsut waste time here for a rumour, we had done these.*


----------



## S10

There was one thread today, yesterday, and the day before. Actually I see similar threads every once in a while since 2008. China must have hundreds of Su-35 by now, since somebody keeps ordering them for us.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## danger007

huh, so chinese can discuss any thing based on blog's etc against India etc.. But if it is subjected to chinese it should be closed... funny..


----------



## sweetgrape

danger007 said:


> huh, so chinese can discuss any thing based on blog's etc against India etc.. But if it is subjected to chinese it should be closed... funny..



If the blog's etc are not true, just like your indian post like these:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/chinese-defence/221207-china-buying-russia-s-su-35-fighter.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/chinese-defence/218768-china-resumes-talks-russia-su-35-purchase.html
Which turn into trolling war, it should be closed, but if the news from blog is true, why can't be discussed, I know you indian like believe in western news.

As you read the comments in above two threads, most are turn into wasting time quarrel, no sense, about whether china import SU-35, it had been discussed, why should waste time to discuss it, even we start the argument, what can you indian say? without trolling and mocking, such as China face big problem in developing J-31 or new engine, what can you say? you can give constructive comment here? 

You indian have post such news one by one, I know what you want, why can't wait for official confirm, then you can mocking china well, why not be patient, it is not long time can know the fact, you do can spend more than 30 years for LCA, why can't wait a few time for the official confirm of business?

Do not reply, don't waste more time to argum with you in these thread, after the news be confirmed by china government, I will be glad to read you indian comment on the news, any comment, and keep smile.


----------



## danger007

^^^^ you are pathetic troll.. the thread is about su-35 and china why you bring LCA into this thread... oh you got hurt because i am Indian? lol....


----------



## S10

danger007 said:


> ^^^^ you are pathetic troll.. the thread is about su-35 and china why you bring LCA into this thread... oh you got hurt because i am Indian? lol....


Just you being Indian is funny enough, no need to bring the LCA comedy in.


----------



## qwerrty

> *Andrei Chang, editor-in-chief of the Canadian-based Kanwa Defence Review*, said the possible Su-35 deal was aimed at obtaining 117S engines, the most advanced Russian engine installed in a single-seat, twin-engined fighter. &#8220;Beijing wants the engine [of the Su-35]&#8230; because their J-20 project failed to solve the most challenging part &#8211; the engine,&#8221; *Chang said*.



isn't this the same guy said j-20 doesn't exist and china carrier has no arresting gear and **** load of other bs..? 

someone bump those threads again pls just for laugh 

this is no chinese source. this is andrea chang of kanwa 

i found one



> *Kanwa exclusive report
> http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...s-chinese-aircraft-carrier.html#ixzz2ERwdqFfa*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

The moderator has already previously close such thread. Let's wait for him to take action and ban the Indian who start this.

I already report this. Those indian who still want to troll in this thread. Be prepare to get infraction point or get yourself ban.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## qwerrty

funny, how they post source by señor chang that got em slapped in the faces multiple times already as* proper* cridible source 




> Thread with proper source not russians but chinese.... i don't see necessity of removing it or closing the thread...


----------



## UKBengali

Buying SU-35 for China really makes no sense.

Even the 117S engine delivers only around 10KN more thrust than the WS-10A. This is not a big enough improvement for China to gain much from purchase as their latests J-11s are likely to have radar and avionics at least on a par with this fighter.


----------



## Skull and Bones

Russia should prepare for another Su-35 fiasco, coz' very soon J-18 will roll out of Su-35 production lines in China. 



UKBengali said:


> Buying SU-35 for China really makes no sense.
> 
> Even the 117S engine delivers only around 10KN more thrust than the WS-10A. This is not a big enough improvement for China to gain much from purchase as their latests J-11s are likely to have radar and avionics at least on a par with this fighter.



10KT is enough thrust for a fighter in real combat, even F414 for Tejas MK II generates 13-15 KT thrust more than Kaveri.


----------



## 帅的一匹

I think china's decision to go for Su35 is absolutely right. I mean why not?


----------



## lcloo

wanglaokan said:


> I think china's decision to go for Su35 is absolutely right. I mean why not?



Only if Russia is willing to sell the full spec jets with-out downgraded equipment and engine component parts.


----------



## sachin@india

why are chinese got pissed off regarding this ?? they are getting a good jet though..headache for India


----------



## Sasquatch

danger007 said:


> Thread with proper source not russians but chinese.... i don't see necessity of removing it or closing the thread...



Hong Kong Blog with a russian source if it were true it would be reported on Chinese sites( mainland) I have stated this before, not a single source has come yet, if the government confirms I will reopen otherwise just more SU35 rumors.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## FarazUSA

Ð¡Ñ&#402;-35 Ñ&#402;Ð»ÐµÑ&#8218;Ð°ÐµÑ&#8218; Ð² Ð&#353;Ð¸Ñ&#8218;Ð°Ð¹ | Ð&#8226;Ð¶ÐµÐ½ÐµÐ´ÐµÐ»Ñ&#338;Ð½Ð¸Ðº Â«Ð&#8217;Ð¾ÐµÐ½Ð½Ð¾-Ð¿Ñ&#8364;Ð¾Ð¼Ñ&#8249;Ñ&#710;Ð»ÐµÐ½Ð½Ñ&#8249;Ð¹ ÐºÑ&#402;Ñ&#8364;Ñ&#338;ÐµÑ&#8364;Â»


> An intergovernmental Russian-Chinese agreement to supply China multifunctional fighter Su-35.
> "As part of the agreements that we have with the Chinese side, we did in January signed an intergovernmental agreement to supply China Su-35" - said the deputy director of the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation (FSMTC) Vyacheslav Dzirkaln passing on the UAE arms exhibition IDEX-2013, where he heads the Russian delegation.
> 
> According to him, will soon begin consultations to prepare a contract to supply China Su-35 fighters. "This is - well, there is a planned work", - said V.Dzirkaln.
> 
> He did not specify when it can be contracted and how the Su-35 will be delivered to China. But noted that it will not license, and procurement contracts. Ie China will get ready to operate aircraft.
> 
> Today, China is the largest foreign operator fighters Su-27/Su-30 family. Over the years, this country had received a total of 281 aircraft of this type. In addition, China started production of fighter aircraft J-11B, which is actually a clone of the Su-27.
> 
> The Su-35 was developed in OKB Sukhoi. He is a deeply upgraded super-maneuverable multi-role fighter of "4 + +". It uses fifth-generation technologies that provide superior fighter in its class.



Why is China buying Su-35 when they are about to get J20.


----------



## Echo_419

FarazUSA said:


> Ð¡Ñ&#402;-35 Ñ&#402;Ð»ÐµÑ&#8218;Ð°ÐµÑ&#8218; Ð² Ð&#353;Ð¸Ñ&#8218;Ð°Ð¹ | Ð&#8226;Ð¶ÐµÐ½ÐµÐ´ÐµÐ»Ñ&#338;Ð½Ð¸Ðº Â«Ð&#8217;Ð¾ÐµÐ½Ð½Ð¾-Ð¿Ñ&#8364;Ð¾Ð¼Ñ&#8249;Ñ&#710;Ð»ÐµÐ½Ð½Ñ&#8249;Ð¹ ÐºÑ&#402;Ñ&#8364;Ñ&#338;ÐµÑ&#8364;Â»
> 
> 
> Why is China buying Su-35 when they are about to get J20.




Ok now can Chinese shed light on why they are buying inferior russian equipment


----------



## FarazUSA

Echo_419 said:


> Ok now can Chinese shed light on why they are buying inferior russian equipment



Who said Russian equipment is inferior? We ourselves are using Russian Engine Rd-93 for our JF-17.


----------



## chinapakistan

FarazUSA said:


> Ð¡Ñ&#402;-35 Ñ&#402;Ð»ÐµÑ&#8218;Ð°ÐµÑ&#8218; Ð² Ð&#353;Ð¸Ñ&#8218;Ð°Ð¹ | Ð&#8226;Ð¶ÐµÐ½ÐµÐ´ÐµÐ»Ñ&#338;Ð½Ð¸Ðº Â«Ð&#8217;Ð¾ÐµÐ½Ð½Ð¾-Ð¿Ñ&#8364;Ð¾Ð¼Ñ&#8249;Ñ&#710;Ð»ÐµÐ½Ð½Ñ&#8249;Ð¹ ÐºÑ&#402;Ñ&#8364;Ñ&#338;ÐµÑ&#8364;Â»
> 
> 
> Why is China buying Su-35 when they are about to get J20.



I do not know if it is true, you know, Russia always says china will buy blablabla, but in most case, they are just made-up stories which are used by Russia for the purpose I think you know. If it is true, they only thinkable reason is J20's production capacity can not satisfy PLA's needs. We need more good jets ASAP.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## darkhero

Echo_419 said:


> Ok now can Chinese shed light on why they are buying inferior russian equipment



First of all, the news is not confirmed.

Second, Russian weapons have their own merits. 

Third, there are many Chinese sayings like &#20182;&#23665;&#20043;&#30707;&#65292;&#21487;&#20197;&#25915;&#29577; and &#19977;&#20154;&#34892;&#65292;&#24517;&#26377;&#25105;&#24072; etc. The main point is: be modest, you can learn a lot from others no matter who they are.

If we can, we should also buy LCA and Arjun tank. You can learn many things even from failed projects.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## FarazUSA

chinapakistan said:


> I do not know if it is true, you know, Russia always says china will buy blablabla, but in most case, they are just made-up stories which are used by Russia for the purpose I think you know. If it is true, they only thinkable reason is J20's production capacity can not satisfy PLA's needs. We need more good jets ASAP.



This is from South China Morning Post

PLA signs preliminary deal for 24 Russian Su-35 jet fighters | South China Morning Post



> PLA signs preliminary deal for 24 Russian Su-35 jet fighters
> 
> *Purchase of 24 Su-35s from Russia could be due to problems in developing suitable technology for China's own J-20, analysts say*
> 
> A preliminary deal for the sale of 24 advanced Russian Su-35 jet fighters to the People's Liberation Army indicates the technological hurdles China faces in developing its own J-20, especially in terms of engine technology, military analysts say.
> 
> Mainland and Russian media reported last month that Beijing might purchase 24 Su-35s, an updated version of the fourth generation Su-27, for US$1.5 billion. The deal was first proposed by Moscow two years ago.
> 
> 
> Su-35
> 
> Beijing expressed interest in purchasing only four Su-35s last year, but that was rejected by Moscow, which had originally expected China to buy 48 planes, Moscow's Vedomosti business daily quoted an official from Russia's Federal Service for Military and Technical Co-operation as saying.
> 
> It also quoted Igor Korotchenko, head of the Russian Defence Ministry's public council, as saying Moscow also asked Beijing to sign an agreement not to make copies of the Su-35.
> 
> A Beijing-based PLA senior colonel, who requested anonymity, said: "We decided to buy the Su-35 because it's a fact that our home-made engines have failed to measure up to the Russian products."
> 
> He said China was still playing catch-up, despite recent headlines hailing its progress on military modernisation.
> 
> "Engines have been the biggest headache and we are still trying to cope with it," he said. "The purchase of the Su-35s might help our J-20 project, but there are too many deeper problems hiding in our military industrial system that are hindering our research and development."
> 
> Andrei Chang, editor-in-chief of the Canadian-based Kanwa Defence Review, said the possible Su-35 deal was aimed at obtaining 117S engines, the most advanced Russian engine installed in a single-seat, twin-engined fighter. "Beijing wants the engine [of the Su-35]&#8230; because their J-20 project failed to solve the most challenging part - the engine," Chang said.
> 
> The J-20, China's first stealth fighter, was unveiled early last year. Photographs posted on the internet by mainland military enthusiasts show the J-20 prototype has a stealth body shape similar to the American F-22 and F-35, with a hint of the Russian Su-27 in its turbofan engines. Military experts at home and overseas do not expect the J-20 to enter service until 2018 because of the engine problem.
> 
> Beijing's earlier expression of interest in purchasing only four Su-35s was rejected by Russia because of copycat concerns, the Moscow Times reported.
> 
> "Beijing compromised on the size of [the Su-35 deal] &#8230; because they think 24 is an acceptable negotiation quantity, while Moscow feels it is worth considering," Chang said.
> 
> The deal could also give a much-needed boost to Russia's military industry, which desperately needs China's business because formerly stalwart customers are proving less reliable.
> 
> "The Russian side has found their Su-35 production line lacks enough orders to [reduce unit cost and make it a profitable project]," Chang said.
> 
> "Russia originally expected some sales to Libya, who promised to order some [Su-35] jets under Muammar Gaddafi's administration, while Venezuela also planned to place orders," he said. "But both have now backtracked on those promises due to political upheaval at home." However, the export of Su-35s to China has stirred up a heated debate among Russian defence industry enterprises and military officials, with opponents to the deal highlighting China's history of copying Russian weapons, Chang said.
> 
> China has long been producing unauthorised copies of the Russian Su-27 - as the Jian-11. It has also designed a two-seat fighter bomber version (the Jian-16) and a stealth version (the Jian-17), and obtained an aircraft-carrier-based version of the Su-30 from Ukraine to produce the Jian-15.
> 
> But Beijing insists they are all indigenous designs that just happen to bear some resemblance to Russian fighters.
> 
> "I think the Su-35 deal will be submitted to the Kremlin to make the final decision," Chang said, adding there was still a long way to go before a final deal was signed.
> 
> "China and Russia have just signed a memorandum this year, meaning both sides have yet to decide on the deal because they need further rounds of negotiation and discussion involving prices, which models of Su-35 will be exported, what kinds of weapons systems will be involved in the deal, technology transfer and other details."


----------



## Windjammer

_What's the present status of the J-20.....has it entered production or still in prototype configuration. ??_
*
The SU-35 news seems to be authentic.*


*
China will buy Russias state-of-the-art jetfighters Su-35.*
Feb 20, 2013 12:22 Moscow Time.

An intergovernmental agreement to that end was signed in January, with the parties due to start consultations on drawing up a contract to that end at an early date, Deputy Director of the Federal Service for Military Technological Cooperation Vyacheslav Dzirkaln has told reporters.

He failed to specify the number of aircraft to be supplied to China, but said that Beijing will get the aircraft that will be ready for operational service.

Su-35 has been designed by the Sukhoi Design Office. It is an updated air-superiority multipurpose jetfighter that makes use of the fifth-generation technologies.

Voice of Russia, Interfax
China to buy Russia

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## chinapakistan

darkhero said:


> First of all, the news is not confirmed.
> 
> Second, Russian weapons have their own merits.
> 
> Third, there are many Chinese sayings like &#20182;&#23665;&#20043;&#30707;&#65292;&#21487;&#20197;&#25915;&#29577; and &#19977;&#20154;&#34892;&#65292;&#24517;&#26377;&#25105;&#24072; etc. The main point is: be modest, you can learn a lot from others no matter who they are.
> 
> If we can, we should also buy LCA and Arjun tank. *You can learn many things even from failed projects*.



Indeed, bro. We can learn why they failed, it is much more important than what can be learnt from a sucessful project.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Echo_419

Most of the Chinese here say russian equipment is inferior not the Pakistanis 
All I am asking why you are buying inferior equipment


----------



## KRAIT

wait....are people saying that one can learn from failed projects ? 

I am happy to see that people understanding what we have been saying for a long time.

Bookmarking this page.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## xyxmt

darkhero said:


> First of all, the news is not confirmed.
> 
> Second, Russian weapons have their own merits.
> 
> Third, there are many Chinese sayings like &#20182;&#23665;&#20043;&#30707;&#65292;&#21487;&#20197;&#25915;&#29577; and &#19977;&#20154;&#34892;&#65292;&#24517;&#26377;&#25105;&#24072; etc. The main point is: be modest, you can learn a lot from others no matter who they are.
> 
> If we can, we should also buy LCA and Arjun tank. *You can learn many things even from failed projects*.



you can learn what not to make

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## chinapakistan

Echo_419 said:


> Most of the Chinese here say russian equipment is inferior not the Pakistanis
> All I am asking why you are buying inferior equipment



Refer to post #4 and #5.


----------



## KRAIT

chinapakistan said:


> I do not know if it is true, you know, Russia always says china will buy blablabla, but in most case, they are just made-up stories which are used by Russia for the purpose I think you know. If it is true, they only thinkable reason is J20's production capacity can not satisfy PLA's needs. We need more good jets ASAP.


J-20 is 5th gen. Su-35 is 4++ gen. I think China will rather induct J-10 ? What's you take ?


----------



## chinapakistan

KRAIT said:


> wait....are people saying that one can learn from failed projects ?
> 
> I am happy to see that people understanding what we have been saying for a long time.
> 
> Bookmarking this page.



The experience of failure is also very precious. Knowing this, at least we can prevent it from becoming a failed project.



KRAIT said:


> J-20 is 5th gen. Su-35 is 4++ gen. I think China will rather induct J-10 ? What's you take ?



I do not think J10 and Su-35 are designed for the same usage.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## FarazUSA

Windjammer said:


> _What's the present status of the J-20.....has it entered production or still in prototype configuration. ??_
> *
> The SU-35 news seems to be authentic.*
> 
> 
> *
> China will buy Russias state-of-the-art jetfighters Su-35.*
> Feb 20, 2013 12:22 Moscow Time.
> 
> An intergovernmental agreement to that end was signed in January, with the parties due to start consultations on drawing up a contract to that end at an early date, Deputy Director of the Federal Service for Military Technological Cooperation Vyacheslav Dzirkaln has told reporters.
> 
> He failed to specify the number of aircraft to be supplied to China, but said that Beijing will get the aircraft that will be ready for operational service.
> 
> Su-35 has been designed by the Sukhoi Design Office. It is an updated air-superiority multipurpose jetfighter that makes use of the fifth-generation technologies.
> 
> Voice of Russia, Interfax
> China to buy Russia



This is what worries me the most. We are totally dependent on China for a fifth generation fighter aircraft. We should have some backup plan in case, they are not successful (god forbids).


----------



## djsjs

everybody knows that our own engine is not good enough.so buy some Su35 is not big news if russians don't sell us 117s engines .
anyway, such news is nothing before confirmed by PLA.


----------



## Echo_419

chinapakistan said:


> Refer to post #4 and #5.



I clearly said that Pakistanis have never said russian equipment 

& for post number 5 you refer to post no 6


----------



## khanboy007

Lookin good

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Echo_419

djsjs said:


> everybody knows that our own engine is not good enough.so buy some Su35 is not big news if russians don't sell us 117s engines .
> anyway, such news is nothing before confirmed by PLA.




Copy paste copy paste 
Yeah we know that


----------



## danger007

most of the chinese member said we dnt want SU-35. what happen now... what happen to J-20. why they are going to Inferior Russian?


----------



## HongWu

China is buying 24 Su-35 and 117S engines to study the technology, maybe to use as aggressor squadrons.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## danger007

djsjs said:


> that's our difference and what you lack of .
> if you have got the ability to copy paste, you don't have to spend tens of billions dollars on foreign weapons every year.
> and look at the carriers, we bought a piece of iron scrap with $ 20 million and turned it into Liaoning. and how much money do you pay russia for your (free) Vikramaditya?



In defence nothing is wrong, because every one use to do same but secretly.... ok.... and once you are the largest weapons importer we are next to you.... now we are .... so things will change along with the time...


----------



## djsjs

danger007 said:


> most of the chinese member said we dnt want SU-35. what happen now... what happen to J-20. why they are going to Inferior Russian?



nothing changed ,we don't want Su 35....if you want some ,we can sell you ,but no engine.in condition if we have bought some.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

FarazUSA said:


> Ð¡Ñ-35 ÑÐ»ÐµÑÐ°ÐµÑ Ð² ÐÐ¸ÑÐ°Ð¹ | ÐÐ¶ÐµÐ½ÐµÐ´ÐµÐ»ÑÐ½Ð¸Ðº Â«ÐÐ¾ÐµÐ½Ð½Ð¾-Ð¿ÑÐ¾Ð¼ÑÑÐ»ÐµÐ½Ð½ÑÐ¹ ÐºÑÑÑÐµÑÂ»
> 
> 
> Why is China buying Su-35 when they are about to get J20.



Simple, if there is relelevant technology on SU-35 that can feel the gap between J-11b and J-20, why we want to refuse?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## waheedtaj

darkhero said:


> The main point is: be modest, you can learn a lot from others no matter who they are.
> 
> You can learn many things even from failed projects.



I think you had some spelling errors.

*The main point is: be modest, you can COPY a lot from others no matter who they are.
*You can Copy many things even from failed projects.


----------



## RIMPAC

If we can get new tech from Su-35, then we should buy it. It will help full the gaps.


----------



## Beast

Echo_419 said:


> Ok now can Chinese shed light on why they are buying inferior russian equipment



Cut and paste news from Russian side. Until we see any news reported by Xinhua, all is made up by our dear Russian.


----------



## chinapakistan

waheedtaj said:


> I think you had some spelling errors.
> 
> *The main point is: be modest, you can COPY a lot from others no matter who they are.
> *You can Copy many things even from failed projects.



Kid, I know it is too hard for you to understand u can't copy a product without learnning and understanding the architectures, tech completely. Go back to school and get a life.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

FarazUSA said:


> This is from South China Morning Post
> 
> PLA signs preliminary deal for 24 Russian Su-35 jet fighters | South China Morning Post



South China post also cut and paste news from other bogus website. Xinhua news is the official broadcastor of CCP. Please do not think this is official.



FarazUSA said:


> This is what worries me the most. We are totally dependent on China for a fifth generation fighter aircraft. We should have some backup plan in case, they are not successful (god forbids).




Stop posting junk news and link. You all know Russian style! From Tu-22 bomber, Su-33, Lada submarine and now Su-35...

All is made up news by Russian.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jackyy

chinapakistan said:


> I think before that we need to investigate why LCA failed first, because it is too hard for us to understand how can a simple and easy project as LCA fail. From our point of view, it is much more difficult to make such simple project failed than successful. You are genius.



Tell me how LCA is failed


----------



## GR!FF!N

@topic..many time same news was posted in this forum and many times it was rejected by Chinese members as bluff..but as we can see,Russians are selling those jets to chinese,and we all know what happen next.but i don't see anything wrong in that.China desperately needs powerful engines to power their jets and building next gen engines will take time.so,they will use short cut.but I wonder,isn't WS 15 ready yet??and what powered their J-20??are those AL-31 as well???what is their 5th gen engines(Like Russia has Al-41)???

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Speeder 2

no more news on buying Tu-22M? No Su-33? or next week? next month?




 c'mon it's no fun any more. some mod pls lock this weekly troll thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Myth_buster_1

Imagine all flanker fleet in PLAAF including J-11 are upgraded with reverse engineered Su-35 technology! Pakistan should try to get hand on them...



Speeder 2 said:


> no more news on buying Tu-22M? No Su-33? or next week? next month?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> c'mon it's no fun any more. some mod pls lock this weekly troll thread.



China does not want to buy anything from Russia in large numbers, they prefer to buy one or two for sample and build their own stuff.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

Myth_buster_1 said:


> Imagine all flanker fleet in PLAAF including J-11 are upgraded with reverse engineered Su-35 technology! Pakistan should try to get hand on them...
> 
> China does not want to buy anything from Russia in large numbers, they prefer to buy one or two for sample and build their own stuff.



Su-35 is a technology windows for China, why refuse it?, we will filter out all the craps and get only what we need

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

FarazUSA said:


> This is from South China Morning Post
> 
> PLA signs preliminary deal for 24 Russian Su-35 jet fighters | South China Morning Post



South China Morning is an anti-China website.



Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Su-35 is a technology windows for China, why refuse it?, we will filter out all the craps and get only what we need



We already have J-20, why would we need this?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## FarazUSA

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> South China Morning is an anti-China website.



Sorry, didn't know that.


----------



## Speeder 2

NO, SCMP is not anti-china per se, but just a tabloid paper particualrly on defence-related dings.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

FarazUSA said:


> Sorry, didn't know that.



Guy like Andrei Chang is some of the most notorious China bashers.

Not because his ethnicity is Chinese, thus he is reliable about China.

This guy doesn't have a clue about what he is talking about, he once said that J-20 prototype is just a mock up, if this thing could fly, he would close his magazine. Now, he has been proven to be wrong, but did he keep his promise? Nope.

He also said that China cannot produce the arresting cable for the aircraft carrier, now China has just landed J-15 on CV-16 with its reliable indigenous arresting cable. Big mouth again from Andrei Chang of Kanwa.

This guy is just another example of a self-hating nutcase.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> We already have J-20, why would we need this?



J-20 is still on development state, If China really want to buy SU-35 mean there is something worthed otherwise it's a wast of moneys but we're not like to buy huge quantities as they wish. 

With the geopolitic environment changed: India is more pro-western than before, Russian arm market is been shrunk due to India's order from the west especilly: Rafale, Apache, C-17. Chenook...these are all big ticket items, so Russia need to diversify itself also they want to show that without India, they still can sell to India's foe such China as warning shot.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> J-20 is still on development state, If China really want to buy SU-35 mean there is something worthed otherwise it's a wast of moneys.



Dude, we don't have unlimited fund, if we spend all our money to buy the foreign weapons, then it would seriously affect the development of our indigenous weapons.

Next time, any unconfirmed report of the Su-35 deal should be banned.

I would just make a request to Hu Songshan right now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

You people are serious? This rumor has been circling the internet for the past seven years and some people are still swayed by it. First of all, the Chinese department of defense has already outright denied the deal and said that such an aircraft did not fit China's needs. Second of all, it would make no sense to purchase the Su-35 while continuing the production of the J-11B, J-15, J-16. Third of all, if it were true, then that means the Su-35 would be delivered at a time when the J-20 and J-31 would have already started entering service, and when the J-11B, J-15, J-16, J-10B would have been in service in large numbers. At that time, then such a deal would no longer be useful. And finally, the Russians also reported that China would by Slava cruiser, T-80, T-50, Tu-22M3, Tu-160, Amur, etc, none of which came to fruition.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Peregrine

danger007 said:


> most of the chinese member said we dnt want SU-35. what happen now... what happen to J-20. why they are going to Inferior Russian?



What happened to PAK-FA and FGFA? why bother to go for Rafale? why even consider any other jet when you have super duper MKI? Indians and their logic...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bhai Zakir

china's import of Russian plane punctured the self boasting of many cpc fan boys. It also proves that chinese are no where near the 5th gen plane.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Dude, *we don't have unlimited fund, if we spend all our money to buy the foreign weapons*, then it would seriously affect the development of our indigenous weapons.
> 
> Next time, *any unconfirmed report of the Su-35 deal should be banned*.
> 
> I would just make a request to Hu Songshan right now.



*What you gonna do if our gorvernment decide to buy SU-35 with XYZ reasons?* SU-35 is not an apocalytical issue, in contrary I consider it as fun to debate it, if we Chinese can't even handle the thread either it's real of fictif...then we can just declare ourself losers and leave this forum.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> *What you gonna do if our gorvernment decide to buy SU-35 with XYZ reasons?* SU-35 is not an apocalytical issue, in contrary I consider it as fun to debate it, if we Chinese can't even handle the thread either it's real of fictif...then we can just declare ourself losers and leave this forum.



The real question should be: *What you gonna do if our government decide not to buy SU-35 with XYZ reasons?*

Over 7 years, no real confirmation at all, only those military newbies would buy this kind of garbage from the Russian propaganda machine.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

Bhai Zakir said:


> china's import of Russian plane punctured the self boasting of many cpc fan boys. It also proves that chinese are no where near the 5th gen plane.



We chinese are pragmatic and realist, we're not longer self condamned as during Ching dynasty to have a close mind and live in close society, sure we gladly import if Russian plane fit our need but we will not let them do as what they did with India as "finshing engineering" that's why we develop ourself the so call "5th gen plane" 



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The real question should be: *What you gonna do if our government decide not to buy SU-35 with XYZ reasons?*
> 
> Over 7 years, no real confirmation at all, only those military newbies would buy this kind of garbage from the Russian propaganda machine.



Even 100 years without any confirmation , why bother us?...let people talk, if that's a talk show for century, our grand children will take over and they will have great laugh over this issue...don't you think


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> We chinese are pragmatic and realist, we're not longer self condamned as during Ching dynasty to have a close mind and live in close society, sure we gladly import if Russian plane fit our need but we will not let them do as what they did with India as "finshing engineering" that's why we develop ourself the so call "5th gen plane"



Yes, we are pragmatic and realistic, but we don't waste our money for nothing.

Tell me what kind of advantage that Su-35 has?

PESA: It is a joke to China right now, all J-11B and J-10B have started with AESA.

Composite materials: You can compare J-20 with PAK FA, who is more advanced in this aspect.

Engine: They have 117S, but we have WS-10X, and even the Su-35 is not yet in the mass production stage, i don't know how they can supply these engines to us when they have the supply shortage even for themselves.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Yes, we are pragmatic and realistic, but we don't waste our money for nothing.
> 
> Tell me what kind of advantage that Su-35 has?
> 
> PESA: It is a joke to China right now, all J-11B and J-10B have started with AESA.
> 
> Composite materials: You can compare J-20 with PAK FA, who is more advanced in this aspect.
> 
> Engine: They have 117S, but we have WS-10X, and even the Su-35 is not yet in the mass production stage, i don't know how they can supply these engines to us when they have the supply shortage even for themselves.



I'm not aerospace engineer nor expert in fighter issue and even less on what really is the microscopic detail between J-11b and Su-35, but one thing that we can be sure that the differents between the two is what we're looking for...as you said why waste money for nothing?


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> I'm not aerospace engineer nor expert in fighter issue and even less on what really is the microscopic detail between J-11b and Su-35, but one thing that we can be sure that the differents between the two is what we're looking for...as you said why waste money for nothing?



From all those technical details, it is proven there is no reason for China to buy Su-35.

J-11B can fulfill every role of Su-35, then what's the point to buy Su-35?

Unless CPC wanna help the Russian economy by purchasing their products, but technically it has no benefit to us.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> From all those technical details, it is proven there is no reason for China to buy Su-35.
> 
> *If you don't know that much, you should stay quiet*.
> 
> J-11B can fulfill every role of Su-35, then what's the point to buy Su-35?
> 
> Unless CPC wanna help the Russian economy by purchasing their stuffs, but technically it has no benefit to us.



Dude, what make you more knowledgeable than me beside crap talk? have you really inspect both J-11b and SU-35 to make your judgement?. If you dare to confirm that you have done the inspection job then I will for ever stay quiet over this issue...LMAO


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Dude, what make you more knowledgeable than me beside crap talk? have you really inspect both J-11b and SU-35 to make your judgement?. If you dare to confirm that you have done the inspection job then I will for ever stay quiet over this issue...LMAO



You have zero knowledge, therefore you should not involve into the topic like that.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> You have zero knowledge, therefore you should not involve into the topic like that.



Yeah...sound like you're certified over J-11b and SU-35 to handle this issue


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Yeah...sound like you're certified over J-11b and SU-35 to handle this issue



First, you should know the difference between an AESA radar and a PESA radar before you wanna start a new debate.

And then you should also know the difference between an AL-31F engine and a WS-10A engine by judging their outer appearance.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> First, you should know the difference between an AESA radar and a PESA radar before you wanna start a new debate.
> 
> And then you should also know the difference between an AL-31F engine and a WS-10A engine by judging their outer appearance.



If you really want to debate, listed a full detail about each aircraft J11b and SU35 include weapons that it can carry. I don't think you have all these informations beside some basic informations from internet, what ever we talk here is base on speculation and assumption nothing is real. Only chinese official that Russian is willing to provide the full detail of SU-35, so they can judge the difference from J-11b and decide if Su-35 is worthed to buy or not.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> If you really want to debate, listed a full detail about each aircraft J11b and SU35 include weapons that it can carry. I don't think you have all these informations beside some basic informations from internet, what ever we talk here is base on speculation and assumption nothing is real. Only chinese official that Russian is willing to provide the full detail of SU-35, so they can judge the difference from J-11b and decide if Su-35 is worthed to buy or not.



Nobody here is a real military expert, but you have to be able to gather all those available informations and analyze by yourself.

When you don't even have those basic knowledges, who could start a serious debate with you?

Beside, no real confirmation yet, so no gibberish talking.


----------



## Sasquatch

Source of this is Russian and the news of the Su35 has been going on since 2006, and the recent news of China buying Tu22 which turned out untrue I am skeptical of this.

http://www.businessinsider.com/russ...ombers-the-aviationist-david-cenciotti-2013-1


I will merge it with the Su35 thread and reopen it if the Government confirms the deal.


----------



## itaskol

&#20013;&#20420;&#31614;&#32626;&#37319;&#36141;24&#26550;&#33487;35&#25112;&#26426;&#19982;4&#33368;&#25289;&#36798;&#32423;&#28508;&#33351;&#21512;&#21516; 2013&#24180;03&#26376;25&#26085; 09:52&#12288;&#26469;&#28304;&#65306;&#20013;&#22269;&#26032;&#38395;&#32593;
&#20013;&#26032;&#32593;3&#26376;25&#26085;&#30005; &#25454;&#22830;&#35270;&#26032;&#38395;&#25253;&#36947;&#65292;&#26085;&#21069;&#65292;&#20013;&#20420;&#31614;&#32626;&#37325;&#22823;&#20891;&#21806;&#26694;&#26550;&#21327;&#35758;&#12290;&#20013;&#20420;&#21512;&#20316;&#24314;&#36896;4&#25628;&#8220;&#25289;&#36798;&#8221;&#32423;AIP&#28508;&#33351;&#20986;&#21806;&#32473;&#20013;&#22269;&#12290;&#20013;&#22269;&#21521;&#20420;&#37319;&#36141;24&#26550;&#33487;35&#25112;&#26426;&#12290;

&#20013;&#20420;&#31614;&#32626;&#37319;&#36141;24&#26550;&#33487;35&#25112;&#26426;&#19982;4&#33368;&#25289;&#36798;&#32423;&#28508;&#33351;&#21512;&#21516;

finally contract signed. 24 su 35 and 4 subs.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 帅的一匹

Great news, SU35 is an excellent platform. Instead of spending cash buying junk bond from USA, we should buy some good wepon system from Russia.
We can use the SU35 technology as a reference to update our SU series in PLA's inventory.


----------



## djsjs

the last fighter they can sell us.next step is to get there tech of heavy helicopter.


----------



## 帅的一匹

A good China and Russia relationship is very much appreciated to counter threat from USA.


----------



## alibaz

Great news, congrats friends


----------



## 帅的一匹

maybe we should talk about the procurement of TU160 bomber with President Putin?



djsjs said:


> the last fighter they can sell us.next step is to get there tech of heavy helicopter.


Russia is still ahead of China in many fields, we still need to learn from them. &#35878;&#34394;&#20351;&#20154;&#36827;&#27493;&#65292;&#39556;&#20658;&#35753;&#20154;&#33853;&#21518;&#12290;maybe someday in the future, Russia will buy weapon system from China.


----------



## itaskol

don&#8216;t know how much we have to pay for these 24 Su 35. it was not mentioned in official news.
hope they are not expensive.


----------



## Ammyy

itaskol said:


> &#20013;&#20420;&#31614;&#32626;&#37319;&#36141;24&#26550;&#33487;35&#25112;&#26426;&#19982;4&#33368;&#25289;&#36798;&#32423;&#28508;&#33351;&#21512;&#21516; 2013&#24180;03&#26376;25&#26085; 09:52&#12288;&#26469;&#28304;&#65306;&#20013;&#22269;&#26032;&#38395;&#32593;
> &#20013;&#26032;&#32593;3&#26376;25&#26085;&#30005; &#25454;&#22830;&#35270;&#26032;&#38395;&#25253;&#36947;&#65292;&#26085;&#21069;&#65292;&#20013;&#20420;&#31614;&#32626;&#37325;&#22823;&#20891;&#21806;&#26694;&#26550;&#21327;&#35758;&#12290;&#20013;&#20420;&#21512;&#20316;&#24314;&#36896;4&#25628;&#8220;&#25289;&#36798;&#8221;&#32423;AIP&#28508;&#33351;&#20986;&#21806;&#32473;&#20013;&#22269;&#12290;&#20013;&#22269;&#21521;&#20420;&#37319;&#36141;24&#26550;&#33487;35&#25112;&#26426;&#12290;
> 
> &#20013;&#20420;&#31614;&#32626;&#37319;&#36141;24&#26550;&#33487;35&#25112;&#26426;&#19982;4&#33368;&#25289;&#36798;&#32423;&#28508;&#33351;&#21512;&#21516;
> 
> finally contract signed. 24 su 35 and 4 subs.



Sub ?? Which one?


----------



## itaskol

Ammyy said:


> Sub ?? Which one?



Lada-class


----------



## xuxu1457

itaskol said:


> don&#8216;t know how much we have to pay for these 24 Su 35. it was not mentioned in official news.
> hope they are not expensive.


65million$ /unite, 1.5billion$ for 24 Su-35


----------



## shree835

Just few days back, Chinese used to claim that they are not buying SU-35 or any other Plane from Russia or somewhere else&#8230; Lot of BIG words was coming out&#8230;. Where is those brigade now&#8230;???

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ammyy

shree835 said:


> Just few days back, Chinese used to claim that they are not buying SU-35 or any other Plane from Russia or somewhere else&#8230; Lot of BIG words was coming out&#8230;. Where is those brigade now&#8230;???



Most funny part is Su35 is still a 4th gen fighter and some people here said Chinese fifth generation fighters are better then russian.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xuxu1457

1.5billion $ for 24 Su-35, about 2 billion$ for 4 Subs(two made in Russia, two made in China);

Will be OK for China to rival US Japan F-35 before J-20 Mass production&#65292;and let T-50 get more funds&#65292; 1.5 billion only 1.2% of China's year defence cost, 65million a good price.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 帅的一匹

shree835 said:


> Just few days back, Chinese used to claim that they are not buying SU-35 or any other Plane from Russia or somewhere else&#8230; Lot of BIG words was coming out&#8230;. Where is those brigade now&#8230;???


This is national interest, not someone's personal emotion. i always support buying SU35 from Russia.



xuxu1457 said:


> 1.5billion $ for 24 Su-35, about 2 billion$ for 4 Subs(two made in Russia, two made in China);



will these subs carry VLS?



xuxu1457 said:


> 65million$ /unite, 1.5billion$ for 24 Su-35


much cheaper than Rafale........



Ammyy said:


> Most funny part is Su35 is still a 4th gen fighter and some people here said Chinese fifth generation fighters are better then russian.


J20 need another 5 years to be inducted in PLAAF, so SU 35 will help to reinforce our air control.

when will these sexy babies being delivered to PLAAF?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## itaskol

and BTW. 24 is a good quantity. the russia wanted to sell us more than 48.
24 ist not that much.


----------



## BlueDot_in_Space

??????24??-35?????_????_???

CCTV March 24 "Today's Focus" broadcast "China and Russia signed the purchase of 24 Su-35 fighter contract, the following is the text Record:

Xi Jinping's visit to Russia, China and Russia have just signed two major arms sales to the Framework Agreement. Sino-Russian cooperation in the construction of four state-of-the-art "Lada" class AIP submarine sale to China. China to Russia to buy 24 Su-35 fighter. This is the first time in 10 years after China's first major military combat equipment purchased from Russia.

Alleged that the Russian sales to China Lada class AIP submarine mute capability is very good, four submarines will be "2 plus 2" in the form of joint design and construction for the Chinese navy. Which two will be built in Russia, the other two to be built in China.

China's procurement of new fighters to the Russian Su-35 is a type of fourth-generation fighters closest to the fifth-generation fighter, before serving Chinese stealth fighter, the Su-35 can effectively reduce the pressure of the Chinese air defense. Expected future, China and Russia will reach a new military *technical cooperation contracts, such as the S-400 long-range air defense missile, 117S high-thrust engine, large transport aircraft Il-476, Il-78M aerial tankers.*

Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu pointed out that the importance of the cooperation of Russia and China in the field of military technology to ensure regional stability.

Defense Ministry spokesman Geng Yansheng the colonel also answered questions from reporters on February 18, said the Sino-Russian military-technical cooperation has maintained a healthy development momentum, will further expand cooperation and achieve mutual benefit and win-win. It should be noted that the technical cooperation between China and Russia is not directed against third parties, there is conducive to the peace and stability of the region and the world.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

Source said Lada could launch Brahmos, maybe we should buy some Brahmos from Russia as well.


----------



## itaskol

wanglaokan said:


> Source said Lada could launch Brahmos, maybe we should buy some Brahmos from Russia as well.



IF they sell, then why not.
let&#8217;s buy some brahmos, at least we can test it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cnleio

This's typical political deals between China and Russia.

Sometimes i always think why Russian still willing to sell new fighters to china customer? We(China) had domesitc J-11B, J-15, J-16 fighters developed from original Russia Su-27, Su-33, Su-30. But they(Russia) never mind it, wanna sell more to China,if we need including Su-35 and T-50, so WHY?!!

Except TRUE BROTHERS or KEY FRIENDS, who can offer such unreasonable supports? 24x Su-35 not too many than PLAAF owning 600+ 3-gen fighters Airforce(J10A,J11,J11B,Su30,JH7A), 1.5bil dollars much less than 100+bil of China military expenditure each year.

Welcome Su-35 fly to China, importantly welcome >24x 117S jet engines come to China. As a engineer, related technical reference is invaluable. Yes a good deal cost 1.5bill dollars to improve domestic Chinese aircraft engine industry, 117S jet engines worth for detailed research.

Nexttime could consider to import another 24x Russia T-50 fighters... =)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zarvan

itaskol said:


> &#20013;&#20420;&#31614;&#32626;&#37319;&#36141;24&#26550;&#33487;35&#25112;&#26426;&#19982;4&#33368;&#25289;&#36798;&#32423;&#28508;&#33351;&#21512;&#21516; 2013&#24180;03&#26376;25&#26085; 09:52&#12288;&#26469;&#28304;&#65306;&#20013;&#22269;&#26032;&#38395;&#32593;
> &#20013;&#26032;&#32593;3&#26376;25&#26085;&#30005; &#25454;&#22830;&#35270;&#26032;&#38395;&#25253;&#36947;&#65292;&#26085;&#21069;&#65292;&#20013;&#20420;&#31614;&#32626;&#37325;&#22823;&#20891;&#21806;&#26694;&#26550;&#21327;&#35758;&#12290;&#20013;&#20420;&#21512;&#20316;&#24314;&#36896;4&#25628;&#25289;&#36798;&#32423;AIP&#28508;&#33351;&#20986;&#21806;&#32473;&#20013;&#22269;&#12290;&#20013;&#22269;&#21521;&#20420;&#37319;&#36141;24&#26550;&#33487;35&#25112;&#26426;&#12290;
> 
> &#20013;&#20420;&#31614;&#32626;&#37319;&#36141;24&#26550;&#33487;35&#25112;&#26426;&#19982;4&#33368;&#25289;&#36798;&#32423;&#28508;&#33351;&#21512;&#21516;
> 
> finally contract signed. 24 su 35 and 4 subs.


Great News for China but what are the 4 subs which are signed please share details and SU 35 is really good fighting plane


----------



## 帅的一匹

???2435??-??-?



itaskol said:


> IF they sell, then why not.
> let&#8217;s buy some brahmos, at least we can test it.


Will India has any saying if Russia sell Brahmos to China?


----------



## cnleio

Zarvan said:


> Great News for China but what are the 4 subs which are signed please share details and SU 35 is really good fighting plane


All China designed subs r double-shells, but Russia Lada-class is single-shell.News(i read) also said new Lada-class will use China AIP technology. 

So the reason: "two made in Russia, two made in China", Sub technology exchanges between Russia and China.


----------



## sixth

This is a political deal.
I think this deal is not necessary.


----------



## sixth

The last leadership Hu and Wen don't want to buy weapons from Russia,
after change leadership, the new leadership Zi and Li change mind.
when change leadership, something change too. although a lot of people don't agree.


----------



## cnleio

sixth said:


> This is a political deal.
> I think this deal is not necessary.


Don't forget, Russian still own technology advantage in jet engine design(special thrust-vector engine) and submarine design(special nuclear sub), two things much advanced than China.

This time just spending money to study new technology (technology of 117S thrust-vector engine and single-shell sub design). How Navy's CV16 A.C come from? We bought it from Ukraine and rebuild it in DaLian,before it China knew nothing about A.C, but now i can say China had studied enough experiences and related technology to build domestic new A.C.

It's the cost for studying from another teacher or master. PITY~! U just see the money and cost, didn't see the future, like today TaiWan.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## indian_foxhound

wanglaokan said:


> ???2435??-??-?
> 
> 
> Will India has any saying if Russia sell Brahmos to China?



I though you chinese/pakistani sees BharMos as fail project as russian did not inducted it... anyways its BharMos not Brahmos... india will never allow to give BharMos to china never ever. you can get it under the table but not legal way. as russia is famous for giving tech to china under the table.. @sancho [MENTION=15531]


----------



## 帅的一匹

I don't think Russia will deny China anything we really interested in. They will sell us T50 IF we buy say 50 plus from them.

As to BharMos, we will induct it if with any possibility. We might get some for test.


----------



## indian_foxhound

wanglaokan said:


> I don't think Russia will deny China anything we really interested in. They will sell us T50 IF we buy say 50 plus from them.



T50? Nah i dont think so. India wont allow russia Again... After all we said 36biln till now...


----------



## indian_foxhound

wanglaokan said:


> As to BharMos, we will induct it if with any possibility. We might get some for test.



Not a change about bharmos not even for test
mark my words


----------



## 帅的一匹

India spend 36 billions in the project, but Russia has the final saying whether they will sell T50 to China. lots of India said T50 and FGFA is different in avionics and weapon system, why China can't induct some T50? As China and India are both Friends of Russia, anything will happen.


----------



## sweetgrape

shree835 said:


> Just few days back, Chinese used to claim that they are not buying SU-35 or any other Plane from Russia or somewhere else Lot of BIG words was coming out. Where is those brigade now???


You know, we chinese are brainwashed by CPC, and CPC are not transparent, they don't tell us everything, not like your indian know everything, have much freedom, so we just can argue on this issue, guess the result..
But, all these cater to your mind, you can laughing at chinese for these, right? enjoy these, indian, make your mouth larger!!




Ammyy said:


> Most funny part is Su35 is still a 4th gen fighter and some people here said Chinese fifth generation fighters are better then russian.


I don't know Chinese fifth generation fighter is better than Russian, but I think Chinese 5th fighter is more beautiful than Russian's..
About SU-35, it is a deal, don't over read it, Russian fighter have its advantage, we can learn much from it, but not mean we don't have advantage, of course, you can deny it..
And we have huge surplus with Russia, too much money, we need spend some, or it just paper, why not, even indian with huge trade deficit can buy more weapon than china, why can't we?
BTW, The above thing are "told" by CPC, or its real meaning changed after long conveying!


----------



## indian_foxhound

wanglaokan said:


> India spend 36 billions in the project, but Russia has the final saying whether they will sell T50 to China. lots of India said T50 and FGFA is different in avionics and weapon system, why China can't induct some T50? As China and India are both Friends of Russia, anything will happen.



We are partner. Russia singed a contract not to share same tech with any other country. if i am not wrong ask @Abingdonboy he must be knowing in full details


----------



## 帅的一匹

15 billions for 24 best 4.5 generation fighters in the world, good deal. Russia knows this is the best opportunity to sell China SU35 before J20 induction. Russian is always smart business man to deal with.



indian_foxhound said:


> We are partner. Russia singed a contract not to share same tech with any other country. if i am not wrong ask @abingdonman he must be knowing in full details


Are you saying India will be the only foreign user of T50. OR any term specifically addressed in the contract that T50 is not allowed to be sold to China>?


----------



## cnleio

Another word for interests of the FAR EAST area. 
Russia+China ally v.s America+Japan ally, u bet ??? Still a political deal refer to today East Asia situations.


----------



## indian_foxhound

wanglaokan said:


> 15 billions for 24 best 4.5 generation fighters in the world, good deal. Russia knows this is the best opportunity to sell China SU35 before J20 induction. Russian is always smart business man to deal with.



Your 5th cant fly unless you got 5th gen engine. You need su35 engine so you got just 24 of them for so called "learning"


----------



## 帅的一匹

indian_foxhound said:


> Your 5th cant fly unless you got 5th gen engine. You need su35 engine so you got just 24 of them for so called "learning"


China signed the non-copy paper with Russia in SU35 deal.


----------



## indian_foxhound

wanglaokan said:


> 15 billions for 24 best 4.5 generation fighters in the world, good deal. Russia knows this is the best opportunity to sell China SU35 before J20 induction. Russian is always smart business man to deal with.
> 
> 
> Are you saying India will be the only foreign user of T50. OR any term specifically addressed in the contract that T50 is not allowed to be sold to China>?



No t50 will have many *users* but not china. Because i read some where dont know where. But its there that russia agree not to sell any tech which india is using. Thats why i ask @Abingdonboy to clear this thing. If must be knowing some about it



wanglaokan said:


> China signed the non-copy paper with Russia in SU35 deal.



Lets see. But then why they bought just 24? As you claim that you have enough jets or latest tech. As you claim for 5th gen then whats the use of buying such a small number


----------



## Developereo

indian_foxhound said:


> anyways its BharMos not Brahmos...



I am pretty sure its BrahMos -- named after Brahmaputra and Moskva river in India and Russia, respectively.


----------



## indian_foxhound

Developereo said:


> I am pretty sure its BrahMos -- named after Brahmaputra and Moskva river in India and Russia, respectively.



Yes your guess is right.


----------



## selvan33

indian_foxhound said:


> No t50 will have many *users* but not china. Because i read some where dont know where. But its there that russia agree not to sell any tech which india is using. Thats why i ask @Abingdonboy to clear this thing. If must be knowing some about it
> 
> 
> No. Russia can sell their T50 to anyone,even to pakistan also. but they cant sell FGFA which it requires india's permission too.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sweetgrape

indian_foxhound said:


> No t50 will have many *users* but not china. Because i read some where dont know where. But its there that russia agree not to sell any tech which india is using. Thats why i ask @Abingdonboy to clear this thing. If must be knowing some about it
> 
> 
> 
> Lets see. But then why they bought just 24? As you claim that you have enough jets or latest tech. As you claim for 5th gen then whats the use of buying such a small number


Of course, we will learn from it? Why not?
and why should not we buy huge number as your logic that the deal just for our fifth gen fighter? and as your logic it is very easy to copy onething, seems only you know chinese "intention", russian are fool, so they agree china buy such small number of SU-35, then we copy the "technology" of SU-35, and hurt their interest!!!
Only your indian are smart, right? sounds that you know everything!!


----------



## indian_foxhound

sweetgrape said:


> Of course, we will learn from it? Why not?
> and why should not we buy huge number as your logic that the deal just for our fifth gen fighter? and as your logic it is very easy to copy onething, seems only you know chinese "intention", russian are fool, so they agree china buy such small number of SU-35, then we copy the "technology" of SU-35, and hurt their interest!!!
> Only your indian are smart, right? sounds that you know everything!!



That time will tell buddy... Just wait and watch. Same chinese where saying that they wont buy dey got their 5th gen ready and all. You need engine and you are getting it from su35. No other point it buying 24 jets. When you claim china is self sufficiente. well it is self sufficiente no doubt in it. but what about the engine...?


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Only one condition to buy Su-35 and Amur class subs, it is to set the deal of gas.

With no reasonable price of gas, we won't buy Su-35 and Amur class sub.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xuxu1457

Zarvan said:


> Great News for China but what are the 4 subs which are signed please share details and SU 35 is really good fighting plane



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lada-class_submarine
4 subs, Lada sub ,Russia only made one in 2010, but for AIP problem not mass production, the 4 subs will install with China made AIP system. Two biult in Russia, two built in China. So only 2billion$ for 4 subs, Russia-China co-build sub, also called Amur class, Amur: the boundary river between China-Russia.
20 December 2012, the Russian defense export company signed contract with China about co-designed and built four Amur -1650 fourth-generation conventional submarines for the Chinese navy .


General characteristics
Type:	Submarine
Displacement:	2,700 long tons (2,700 t) submerged; 1,765 t Surfaced
Length:	72 m (236 ft 3 in); 67 m on waterline
Beam:	7.1 m (23 ft 4 in)
Draft:	6.5 m (21 ft 4 in)
Propulsion:	Electric propulsion motor on permanent magnets
Storage battery with increased service life
2 diesel Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) systems based on oxygen-hydrogen fuel cells
1 shaft
2,700 hp (2,013 kW)
Speed:	21 knots (24 mph; 39 km/h)submerged; 10kt surfaced
Endurance:	45 days
Test depth:	300 m (984 ft)
Complement:	34(38) officers and men
Armament:	6 × 533 mm (21 in) torpedo tubes
18 torpedoes SSM
&#8226; RPK-6/SS-N-16 Vodopad/Stallion SUBROC


----------



## Beast

indian_foxhound said:


> That time will tell buddy... Just wait and watch. Same chinese where saying that they wont buy dey got their 5th gen ready and all. You need engine and you are getting it from su35. No other point it buying 24 jets. When you claim china is self sufficiente. well it is self sufficiente no doubt in it. but what about the engine...?



http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistan-air-force/220112-paf-going-get-24-su-35-fighter.html

Becos the 24 Su-35 is not for us... This number precisely fits PAF bill. And this purchase conincident with the sudden break down of news of PAF purchase of J-10B from China.

And don't u think it also conincident with Pakistan active looking for advance sub with AIP? What I know is China is still not ready to offer its most advance AIP sub. Russian is desperate to get it product sale. They are looking at all alternative.


----------



## J-20

..........


----------



## djsjs

J-20 said:


> GREAT DEAL NOW CHINA MILITARY EQUIPMENT SUPPLY RELY ON THE GREAT GREAT RUSSIA AGAIN, CHINA WILL RELY ON RUSSIA FOREVER AND EVER,


why do you still use Chinese flag?
have you ever been to China?


----------



## shree835

Beast said:


> http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistan-air-force/220112-paf-going-get-24-su-35-fighter.html
> 
> Becos the 24 Su-35 is not for us... This number precisely fits PAF bill. And this purchase conincident with the sudden break down of news of PAF purchase of J-10B from China.
> 
> And don't u think it also conincident with Pakistan active looking for advance sub with AIP? What I know is China is still not ready to offer its most advance AIP sub. Russian is desperate to get it product sale. They are looking at all alternative.



This is called Pure trolling&#8230;What you want I can feel that.


----------



## cnleio

Let me tell u, Su-35 is a good fighter. 
Russia willing to sell it, whatever any purpose or political deal, it's just normal weapon trades between China and Russia. Even India spent 12bil to purchase 100+ Rafale from France, why China can't buy 24x Su-35 from Russia? If U.S willing to sell F-35 or F-22 to China, just take it. 

Anyway China J-20 and J-31 stealth fighters sitll testing and flying in China sky, still developing for future udpate. Here some trolls can't change anything, coz PLAAF getting more and more stronger, our war technology developing more powerful, the gaps of domestic weapons industry growing.

Future will face 1000+ 3-gen & 4-gen fighters of PLAAF, and domestic China aircraft manufacturers can produce more if necessary.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Akasa

If the sale of the Su-35 is true, then it must be to make up for the last J-11B batch that was left un-produced.


----------



## Fsjal

Is the Su-35 gonna be used to supplement the J-11B?


----------



## indian_foxhound

Beast said:


> http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistan-air-force/220112-paf-going-get-24-su-35-fighter.html
> 
> Becos the 24 Su-35 is not for us... This number precisely fits PAF bill. And this purchase conincident with the sudden break down of news of PAF purchase of J-10B from China.
> 
> And don't u think it also conincident with Pakistan active looking for advance sub with AIP? What I know is China is still not ready to offer its most advance AIP sub. Russian is desperate to get it product sale. They are looking at all alternative.



What the hell i just read now      buddy what some or drink please tell me. Its damn effective.. I'll ask my friend to take these... Seriously you guys are just the bench mark for limits...


----------



## kurup

itaskol said:


> Lada-class



Which sub is china going to buy ?? Lada or Amur .


----------



## qwerrty

i've read the report. it just reporting the same speculation that came out from russian media 3 or 4 months ago. no one from chinese military department confirm this. not official. it sounds like the people daily and cctv just copy/paste news from military fan site, ifeng.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sancho

itaskol said:


> &#20013;&#20420;&#31614;&#32626;&#37319;&#36141;24&#26550;&#33487;35&#25112;&#26426;&#19982;4&#33368;&#25289;&#36798;&#32423;&#28508;&#33351;&#21512;&#21516; 2013&#24180;03&#26376;25&#26085; 09:52&#12288;&#26469;&#28304;&#65306;&#20013;&#22269;&#26032;&#38395;&#32593;
> &#20013;&#26032;&#32593;3&#26376;25&#26085;&#30005; &#25454;&#22830;&#35270;&#26032;&#38395;&#25253;&#36947;&#65292;&#26085;&#21069;&#65292;&#20013;&#20420;&#31614;&#32626;&#37325;&#22823;&#20891;&#21806;&#26694;&#26550;&#21327;&#35758;&#12290;&#20013;&#20420;&#21512;&#20316;&#24314;&#36896;4&#25628;&#8220;&#25289;&#36798;&#8221;&#32423;AIP&#28508;&#33351;&#20986;&#21806;&#32473;&#20013;&#22269;&#12290;&#20013;&#22269;&#21521;&#20420;&#37319;&#36141;24&#26550;&#33487;35&#25112;&#26426;&#12290;
> 
> &#20013;&#20420;&#31614;&#32626;&#37319;&#36141;24&#26550;&#33487;35&#25112;&#26426;&#19982;4&#33368;&#25289;&#36798;&#32423;&#28508;&#33351;&#21512;&#21516;
> 
> finally contract signed. 24 su 35 and 4 subs.



Any more details about the technical capabilities or the purposes (roles, bases,) mentioned?




kurup said:


> Which sub is china going to buy ?? Lada or Amur .



Lada is the Russian designation, Amur is the export varient.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abingdonboy

wanglaokan said:


> India spend 36 billions in the project, but Russia has the final saying whether they will sell T50 to China. lots of India said T50 and FGFA is different in avionics and weapon system, why China can't induct some T50? As China and India are both Friends of Russia, anything will happen.



BS you think India would spend $30+ BN on the PAK-FA/FGFA project just for Russia to go and sell the platform to someone India doesn't want it sold to?? Are you stupid? Russia had a choice to partner either India or China on the 5th gen project and it chose India-end of story. 

Of course India will get a say in who receives this machine just like it gets a say in who gets the Bhramos and who will get the MTA.


----------



## Sanchez

Come on guys. China buys or not to buy Russian stuff is mainly political. What strength can PLA get by having 20 some fighters and a few submarines. It's either a gesture of friendship or something that PLA wants to look at closely.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

Abingdonboy said:


> BS you think India would spend $30+ BN on the PAK-FA/FGFA project just for Russia to go and sell the platform to someone India doesn't want it sold to?? Are you stupid? Russia had a choice to partner either India or China on the 5th gen project and it chose India-end of story.
> 
> Of course India will get a say in who receives this machine just like it gets a say in who gets the Bhramos and who will get the MTA.


Have you got any firm source that Russia won't sell T50 to China?


----------



## OrionHunter

> China has resumed negotiations with Russia over the purchase of *"4++ generation" *Sukhoi Su-35 multirole fighters.
> 
> Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...alks-russia-su-35-purchase.html#ixzz2OYTPPu00


*"4++ generation"*! Then there'd be a *4+++++++++ generation*!! WTF?  Why can't they just re-christian the damn nomenclature and brand a 4+ as a 5th gen fighter? And a 5+ as a 6th gen and so on? Why do people make life so complicated? Sheeeesh! These ++++s are making me dizzy!


----------



## Abingdonboy

wanglaokan said:


> Have you got any firm source that Russia won't sell T50 to China?



Have you got any source they will? It's common sense man. Forget the Indian angle here, why would the Russians want to give their latest tech that they have spent literally decades developing to China who won't hesitate to infringe IP, reverse engineer the tech and then incorporate it into their own platforms. The SU-35 you can understand to an extent as the Russians know their fifth gen fighter is just around the corner so there isn't too much wrong in giving that tech to China (with as much of the latest tech stripped out) but why would they give the tech they are going to be relying on for the next few decades to China so that right at the outset their latest tech is compromised and irrelevant? 



Looking at India, do you really think any sane nation would throw $30 BN++ at a project without assurances that their interests won't be threatened by this very same project down the line? Is China willing to give $30BN+ to Russia? If not then why would a sale of the PAK-FA (which has concrete orders from both India and Russia, unlike the SU-35) be in Russia's interests? 


Apply a little common sense pal.


----------



## 3Idiots

OrionHunter said:


> *"4++ generation"*! Then there'd be a *4+++++++++ generation*!! WTF?  Why can't they just re-christian the damn nomenclature and brand a 4+ as a 5th gen fighter? And a 5+ as a 6th gen and so on? Why do people make life so complicated? Sheeeesh! These ++++s are making me dizzy!



Because every generation has a key distinguishing characteristic:

4th Gen has to have fly-by-wire.. otherwise the plane isn't 4th Gen (e.g. Mig-21 Bison can't become 4th Gen, despite any kind of overhaul).

Similarly, 5th Gen has to have stealth + internal weapon bays.

4+ just means there is no stealth and internal weapon bays.. although the plane is quite an improvement over plain vanilla 4th Gens.


----------



## 3Idiots

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Only one condition to buy Su-35 and Amur class subs, it is to set the deal of gas.
> 
> With no reasonable price of gas, we won't buy Su-35 and Amur class sub.



That is obviously built into the deal ... there is plenty of cheap.. rather free .. gas coming china's way. 

And that's not all, Russia will give a bouquet of roses to Xi Jinping every time he visits.

Russia also promises to transfer half its wheat production to china for 20 years for free.

These things are just simple "customer service".. no need to mention or be thankul for.


----------



## qwerrty

don't get too excited guys..

this is the real news. it says nothing about these deals. i don't find anything about these signed deals on cctv or peopledaily that those articles quoting them 

do a search. you won't find any..



> China, Russia agree to strengthen defense cooperation
> English.news.cn 2013-03-25 03:11:08
> *ttp://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2013-03/25/c_124496966.htm
> 
> MOSCOW, March 24 (Xinhua) -- Top Chinese and Russian military officials met here on Sunday, with both sides expressing the hope to further strengthen defense cooperation.
> 
> During a meeting with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, Chang Wanquan, Chinese State Councilor and Defense Minister, said that bilateral defense cooperation is a key part of China-Russia relations.
> 
> Through joint efforts, wide-ranging and multi-layer defense cooperation has become a pivot of the China-Russia comprehensive strategic partnership, Chang noted.
> 
> Currently, both sides should work hard to implement the consensus reached by leaders of the two countries, and strengthen military-to-military exchanges and cooperation, said the Chinese minister.
> 
> China is ready to work with Russia to tap the potentials and expand the scope of bilateral defense cooperation, so as to lift it to a new level, Chang said.
> 
> He cited several key areas in the promotion of pragmatic cooperation between the two armed forces, including high-level contact, strategic negotiation, joint exercise and personnel exchange.
> 
> Chang also pointed out that the just-concluded state visit to Russia by Chinese President Xi Jinping has injected new impetus into the two countries' strategic partnership.
> 
> "Given the complex international scenario today, China-Russia strategic cooperation and coordination will not only benefit the two peoples, but also help promote world peace and stability," he observed.
> 
> Shoigu, for his part, hailed the "unprecedented high level" of the Russia-China strategic partnership. The consensus reached by the top leaders has shown the direction of future development of bilateral ties, he noted.
> 
> Russia attaches great importance to mutually beneficial cooperation with China, and is satisfied with the fruitful military exchanges between the two sides, the minister said.
> 
> Russia is willing to strengthen coordination with China and further push forward defense cooperation between the two countries, he added.


----------



## 3Idiots

qwerrty said:


> don't get too excited guys..
> 
> this is the real news. it says nothing about these deals. i don't find anything about these signed deals on cctv or peopledaily that those articles quoting them
> 
> do a search. you won't find any..



Further, no document signed by Xi Jinping was found, stating that there is a deal.

Hence proved.


----------



## qwerrty

nope. it's your proof only


----------



## sweetgrape

indian_foxhound said:


> That time will tell buddy... Just wait and watch. Same chinese where saying that they wont buy dey got their 5th gen ready and all. You need engine and you are getting it from su35. No other point it buying 24 jets. When you claim china is self sufficiente. well it is self sufficiente no doubt in it. but what about the engine...?


Of course, you can wait and watch, beside these, maybe you can talk, all these what you can do, but we will do some action to prove ourself, yes, we have gap with Russia and USA, we are working for matching for them, but anything is possible, before j20, how many person can predict it? 
Your comments are not creative like mine, as a indian "with creativeness", you should feel shamed for liking a brainwashed chinese, hehe!!
BTW, You said "wait and watch", you'd better do as you say, don't talk too much, just show your ignorance!


----------



## kurup

sancho said:


> Lada is the Russian designation, Amur is the export varient.



In wiki the specifications of Lada and the two Amur versions were completely different . So I thought both are different subs.

Is there any variant of Amur with both VLS and AIP ??


----------



## selvan33

Abingdonboy said:


> Have you got any source they will? It's common sense man. Forget the Indian angle here, why would the Russians want to give their latest tech that they have spent literally decades developing to China who won't hesitate to infringe IP, reverse engineer the tech and then incorporate it into their own platforms. The SU-35 you can understand to an extent as the Russians know their fifth gen fighter is just around the corner so there isn't too much wrong in giving that tech to China (with as much of the latest tech stripped out) but why would they give the tech they are going to be relying on for the next few decades to China so that right at the outset their latest tech is compromised and irrelevant?
> 
> 
> 
> Looking at India, do you really think any sane nation would throw $30 BN++ at a project without assurances that their interests won't be threatened by this very same project down the line? Is China willing to give $30BN+ to Russia? If not then why would a sale of the PAK-FA (which has concrete orders from both India and Russia, unlike the SU-35) be in Russia's interests?
> 
> 
> Apply a little common sense pal.



Dude are you the professioner or where you got this common sense news. from your mind or any credible source. first of all india didn't signed any deal with russia for PAK FA. In PAK FA we are just a buyer not a co producer. In FGFA only we are going to start a discussion with russia for a research and development process.And for the third markets, even russia is going to submit FGFA only not a PAK FA. because PAK FA for russian need only. and they can sell that to any one. yeah we can object or we can express our concerns, but we can't stop it. And we cannot spend that much what china can. so russia can sell their water down version of pak fa to any one who are ready to give money and russia barely needs money that we can't afford that much right now.


----------



## indian_foxhound

sweetgrape said:


> Of course, you can wait and watch, beside these, maybe you can talk, all these what you can do, but we will do some action to prove ourself, yes, we have gap with Russia and USA, we are working for matching for them, but anything is possible, before j20, how many person can predict it?
> Your comments are not creative like mine, as a indian "with creativeness", you should feel shamed for liking a brainwashed chinese, hehe!!
> BTW, You said "wait and watch", you'd better do as you say, don't talk too much, just show your ignorance!



1st of all we have free media ... I read what world read.. I know what world knows...so point of getting brainwashed... well I don't see any "creativeness" in your jets design as almost every jets is copied form west or russia...shouting on top of your lungs won't make it "chinese with creativeness design" nor makes you right.... nor your post have any " creativeness" accept this fact.. I know its hard to swallow but no one will make you, your post or your hardware called "with creativeness" and i wonder what you meant by " with creativeness"


----------



## 3Idiots

Is there an RTI Act (Right to Information Act) in China?


----------



## Akasa

The main reason why China bought the Su-35S was to make up for the final J-11B batch that was not produced. This was mainly due to SAC's retooling for the preparation of the production of J-15 and J-16.


----------



## UKBengali

SinoSoldier said:


> The main reason why China bought the Su-35S was to make up for the final J-11B batch that was not produced. This was mainly due to SAC's retooling for the preparation of the production of J-15 and J-16.



Why would China buy 24(?) Su-35s for this reason alone?

It seems like introducing a massively logistical headache for not much gain?


----------



## Abingdonboy

selvan33 said:


> Dude are you the professioner or where you got this common sense news. from your mind or any credible source. first of all india didn't signed any deal with russia for PAK FA. In PAK FA we are just a buyer not a co producer. In FGFA only we are going to start a discussion with russia for a research and development process.And for the third markets, even russia is going to submit FGFA only not a PAK FA. because PAK FA for russian need only. and they can sell that to any one. yeah we can object or we can express our concerns, but we can't stop it. And we cannot spend that much what china can. so russia can sell their water down version of pak fa to any one who are ready to give money and russia barely needs money that we can't afford that much right now.



Actually India has funded quite a bit of the PAK-FA project, yes there is not much design input on the Indian side on the PAK-FA (like it will have with the FGFA) but the funding alone means Russia can't afford to cross India on this matter. 

Regardless of this, India has been able to control Russia's arms exports to India's rivals without lifting a finger. Russia knows which side their bread is buttered.



UKBengali said:


> Why would China buy 24(?) Su-35s for this reason alone?
> 
> It seems like introducing a massively logistical headache for not much gain?


This is a cover, the SU-35 sale in such small numbers is a blatant admission to the world that China is unable to devlop certain key tech namely advanced contemporary engines and certain avionics and sensors.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## UKBengali

Abingdonboy said:


> Actually India has funded quite a bit of the PAK-FA project, yes there is not much design input on the Indian side on the PAK-FA (like it will have with the FGFA) but the funding alone means Russia can't afford to cross India on this matter.
> 
> Regardless of this, India has been able to control Russia's arms exports to India's rivals without lifting a finger. Russia knows which side their bread is buttered.
> 
> 
> This is a cover, the SU-35 sale in such small numbers is a blatant admission to the world that China is unable to devlop certain key tech namely *advanced contemporary engines* and certain avionics and sensors.



You do realise that it is impossible, should say almost impossible, to copy an engine?

That is the reason that the West sells jet airliners to China and does not worry about jet engine tech being reverse engineered by the Chinese.


----------



## Abingdonboy

UKBengali said:


> You do realise that it is impossible, should say almost impossible, to copy an engine?
> 
> That is the reason that the West sells jet airliners to China and does not worry about jet engine tech being reverse engineered by the Chinese.



A turbofan engine off an airliner being copied isn't a worry to anyone, an advanced TVC capable jet engine is a different matter.


----------



## UKBengali

Abingdonboy said:


> A turbofan engine off an airliner being copied isn't a worry to anyone, an advanced TVC capable jet engine is a different matter.


 

Yes it is - the core technology is the same.

Anyway it is nigh-on impossible to copy a turbofan engine.

Otherwise, China would have copied the Al-31 years ago.


----------



## sancho

Sanchez said:


> Come on guys. China buys or not to buy Russian stuff is mainly political. What strength can PLA get by having 20 some fighters and a few submarines. It's either a gesture of friendship or something that PLA wants to look at closely.



A nice try to downplay the procurement. 



wanglaokan said:


> Have you got any firm source that Russia won't sell T50 to China?



Of course he hasn't neither will you find an official Russian source about the sale of Pak Fa (T50 is just the prototype), to China. The fact however is, that anything with Indian involvement (financial or technical) can't be sold without approval from both sides (FGFA, MTA, Brahmos), while Russia still could sell their own versions (Pak Fa, P-800 Oniks), but that's a theory only. If Russia wanted to sell China higher techs, they would have done it for quiet some time and surley would have included you in the Pak Fa program, at least because the economical benefit would be higher, since China would need a higher number of fighters. But that didn't happend and even wrt to radar or engines Russia was always restrictive towards China, so speculating on potential Pak Fa sales has no real base either. 
Infact, if that would have been even remotely possible, China would have taken the early Pak Fa versions, that Russian Air Force wants to induct in 2015, but instead they offered Su 35 ony to increase it's exports.




kurup said:


> Is there any variant of Amur with both VLS and AIP ??



It's always either or so far, since both would require a dedicated module and the addition of 2 moduls in this class seems not to be possible, similar to other AIP SSKs.



UKBengali said:


> Why would China buy 24(?) Su-35s for this reason alone?
> 
> It seems like introducing a massively logistical headache for not much gain?



Exactly, even if the productionline would have to be re-tooled (although it doesn't make much sense for J15), China could also have added some J10B squadrons inhouse, instead of procuring another fighter from an external source. The limited numbers als shows that there is hardly any operational purpose behind it, which leaves mainly what was expected before. It's the techs and capabilities of the fighter that is the important point of the procurement!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ammyy

sancho said:


> It's the techs and capabilities of the fighter that is the important point of the procurement!



Then why Russians risking their high end technology to china just for a billion doller deal?


----------



## sancho

Ammyy said:


> Then why Russians risking their high end technology to china just for a billion doller deal?



Maybe because for them it might not be high tech anymore. IRBIS E is a powerful radar, but a PESA, further developed from the BARS radar which is available for more than a decade now! On the other side, they have Mig 35 prototypes flying with Zhuk AE, BARS AESA is under development and on offer for MKI upgrade, just like to T50 prototypes are already flying and testing their latests AESA radar too.
Same goes for engine as well, althought the 117S is much better than the AL31F or the Chinese engines available so far, for Russia it is not the best anymore, since they are upgrading it again for the use in Pak Fa and already developing an whole new NG engine, for the use in the final Pak Fa / FGFA.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ammyy

@sancho

But still Russians seems so desperate to sell these jets to china even after knowing that this can cause to loss their potential sell to other countries.

May be some political reason behind it.
@sancho

But still Russians seems so desperate to sell these jets to china even after knowing that this can cause to loss their potential sell to other countries.

May be some political reason behind it.


----------



## sancho

Ammyy said:


> @sancho
> 
> But still Russians seems so desperate to sell these jets to china even after knowing that this can cause to loss their potential sell to other countries.



They seems to be desperate yes, but mainly because there is no potential sale to other countries! They have shown and offered the Su 35 on various markets (Asia, Gulf countries and now S. America), but so far not a single customer was found.
For India this won't be a big issue anyway, since Russia offers us even more and the numbers are quiet low to make a big difference, so I don't see any loss for Russia with this sale.


----------



## danger007

Ammyy said:


> @sancho
> 
> But still Russians seems so desperate to sell these jets to china even after knowing that this can cause to loss their potential sell to other countries.
> 
> May be some political reason behind it.
> @sancho
> 
> But still Russians seems so desperate to sell these jets to china even after knowing that this can cause to loss their potential sell to other countries.
> 
> May be some political reason behind it.



Sancho, abingdonboy point it is a JV... which India investing Billions of $$$$$... and India should agree before they sell it to any country....


----------



## sancho

Ammyy said:


> @sancho
> 
> But still Russians seems so desperate to sell these jets to china even after knowing that this can cause to loss their potential sell to other countries.



They seems to be desperate yes, but mainly because there is no potential sale to other countries! They have shown and offered the Su 35 on various markets (Asia, Gulf countries and now S. America), but so far not a single customer was found.
For India this won't be a big issue anyway, since Russia offers us even more and the numbers are quiet low to make a big difference, so I don't see any loss for Russia with this sale.


----------



## danger007

Ammyy said:


> @sancho
> 
> But still Russians seems so desperate to sell these jets to china even after knowing that this can cause to loss their potential sell to other countries.
> 
> May be some political reason behind it.
> @sancho
> 
> But still Russians seems so desperate to sell these jets to china even after knowing that this can cause to loss their potential sell to other countries.
> 
> May be some political reason behind it.



Sancho, abingdonboy point it is a JV... which India investing Billions of $$$$$... and India should agree before they sell it to any country....


----------



## SomeGuy

Abingdonboy said:


> This is a cover, the SU-35 sale in such small numbers is a blatant admission to the world that China is unable to devlop certain key tech namely advanced contemporary engines and certain avionics and sensors.



Why would China want to reverse engineer a PESA, when it already has AESA undergoing testing on J-10B, J-15 & J-16?



UKBengali said:


> Yes it is - the core technology is the same.
> 
> Anyway it is nigh-on impossible to copy a turbofan engine.
> 
> Otherwise, China would have copied the Al-31 years ago.



Exactly. It would be wiser to spend the time, money and effort maturing the WS-15 than to try and reverse engineer the 117S.

If China does buy any Su-35, I think it could be used in training exercises to judge the capabilities of the super-sukhoi upgrades that India gets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## longyi

*China to buy Russian fighters, subs*



BEIJING: China has agreed to buy two dozen fighter jets and four submarines from Russia, state media reported Monday, the country's first large-scale weapons technology purchases from Moscow in a decade.

The agreement to buy the 24 Su-35 fighters and four Lada-class submarines was signed just before President Xi Jinping's weekend visit to Russia, said the People's Daily, the Communist Party organ, citing state television.

The report, which did not give a value for the purchases, said it was the first time in 10 years China had bought "large military technological equipment" from Russia.

The deal comes as Beijing expands its military reach -- it commissioned its first aircraft carrier last year -- and is embroiled in a bitter territorial row with Japan over disputed islands in the East China Sea.

Two of the submarines will be built in Russia, with the other two to be built in China.

"The Su-35 fighters can effectively reduce pressure on China's air defence before Chinese-made stealth fighters come online," the report said.

China and Russia are expected to co-operate further in developing military technology, the report said, including that for S-400 long-range anti-aircraft missiles, 117S large thrust engines, IL-476 large transport aircraft and IL-78 aerial tankers.

China's defence ministry had no immediate comment on the report.

Xi visited Moscow from Friday to Sunday for talks with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, his first trip abroad since becoming head of state earlier this month.

The countries signed around 30 energy and other agreements during the visit.

Xi also met Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu and became the first foreign leader to visit the Russian armed forces' control centre.

Moscow and Beijing, which were once bitter foes during the Cold War, have strengthened cooperation in recent years to counterbalance what they see as US global dominance.

Earlier this month China announced a further double-digit rise in its defence budget, raising it by 10.7 percent to 720.2 billion yuan ($116.3 billion) in 2013.

China to buy Russian fighters, subs - Channel NewsAsia


----------



## UKBengali

SomeGuy said:


> Why would China want to reverse engineer a PESA, when it already has AESA undergoing testing on J-10B, J-15 & J-16?
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly. It would be wiser to spend the time, money and effort maturing the WS-15 than to try and reverse engineer the 117S.
> 
> *If China does buy any Su-35, I think it could be used in training exercises to judge the capabilities of the super-sukhoi upgrades that India gets*.




The most logical reason that I have come across so far.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Johny D

conworldus said:


> *If I get a dollar every time an Indian member posts some Russian BS about selling China Su-35s, I would have more money than the Indian GDP*.



can you prove it? if not, let me decide what shud I call u after that....!


----------



## Sasquatch

The purchase of the Su-35 is most likely for the 117 engines until the WS-15 is ready, WS-10 probably was not adequate for the J-20, on the other hand Ibris is pesa while the J-20 is testing AESA so there is not much need for it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abingdonboy

SomeGuy said:


> Why would China want to reverse engineer a PESA, when it already has AESA undergoing testing on J-10B, J-15 & J-16?



That's the million-dollar question. Why should China, a nation supposedly developing advanced 5th gen fighters, want a 4th gen fighter?

Why indeed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Johny D

Hu Songshan said:


> The purchase of the Su-35 is most likely for the 117 engines until the WS-15 is ready, WS-10 probably was not up to par for testing , on the other hand Ibris is pesa while the J-20 is testing AESA so there is not much need for it.



u need S-35 for 117 engines but don&#8217;t want its Ibris which is a pesa..well, defence deals won&#8217;t work out like that.....smart sellers always ensure that they keep some limitation in their current list of products being up for sale to aliens so that they can get the follow on orders as well as to ensure their own superiority.!


----------



## Abingdonboy

SomeGuy said:


> If China does buy any Su-35, I think it could be used in training exercises to judge the capabilities of the super-sukhoi upgrades that India gets.



This would hardly work because there is a wealth of difference between the SU-35 China will get (possibly) and the SUPER SU-30MKIs India is soon going to get. The PLAF already operate the SU-30MKK so they have an idea of how the MKI performs in basic flight characteristics. There is nothing the SU-53's induction could add to this knowledge. The areas where crucially the SUPER SU-30MKI will differ from the MKK and -35 are key areas of avionics (headline being AESA radar) and weapons and as such a -35 buy won't give the Chinese any knowledge on these.


----------



## Sasquatch

JD_In said:


> u need S-35 for 117 engines but don&#8217;t want its Ibris which is a pesa..well, defence deals won&#8217;t work out like that.....smart sellers always ensure that they keep some limitation in their current list of products being up for sale to aliens so that they can get the follow on orders as well as to ensure their own superiority.!




Of course they don't, Russia probably would not sell the 117s engines like it does the al-31, ibris just came along with the Su-35, in the deal have heard we are getting spares of the 117.

Hmm recent news

Russia denies the deal was signed.

http://www.defensenews.com/article/...Subs-China?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Akasa

Abingdonboy said:


> This would hardly work because there is a wealth of difference between the SU-35 China will get (possibly) and the SUPER SU-30MKIs India is soon going to get. The PLAF already operate the SU-30MKK so they have an idea of how the MKI performs in basic flight characteristics. There is nothing the SU-53's induction could add to this knowledge. The areas where crucially the SUPER SU-30MKI will differ from the MKK and -35 are key areas of avionics (headline being AESA radar) and weapons and as such a -35 buy won't give the Chinese any knowledge on these.



The Su-35S will almost certainly be an excellent aggressor to simulate MKI and MKM. Seeing that the J-11B has similar upgrades to the Super 30 MKI (such as AESA, composites, RAM, IRST, MAWS), it is logical to choose the similar Su-35.



Abingdonboy said:


> That's the million-dollar question. Why should China, a nation supposedly developing advanced 5th gen fighters, want a 4th gen fighter?
> 
> Why indeed.



According to military insiders, the reason why the Su-35S is inducted, and in numbers of 24, is that the J-15 and J-16 production meant that Shenyang had to close down the J-11B line early. The final batch of J-11B was not produced, and therefore the similar Su-35S was meant to make up that number, which is 24.



Hu Songshan said:


> The purchase of the Su-35 is most likely for the 117 engines until the WS-15 is ready, WS-10 probably was not adequate for the J-20, on the other hand Ibris is pesa while the J-20 is testing AESA so there is not much need for it.



That is unlikely, since a perfect regiment would not sacrifice one or two aircraft for the sake of reverse engineering. The Su-35S is almost certainly used to complement and compensate for the J-11B regiment that later got pushed aside in China.



UKBengali said:


> Why would China buy 24(?) Su-35s for this reason alone?
> 
> It seems like introducing a massively logistical headache for not much gain?



24 is the normal number for a typical regiment of fighters. The Chinese aren't too happy about missing a regiment.


----------



## Akasa

sancho said:


> Exactly, even if the productionline would have to be re-tooled (although it doesn't make much sense for J15), China could also have added some J10B squadrons inhouse, instead of procuring another fighter from an external source. The limited numbers als shows that there is hardly any operational purpose behind it, which leaves mainly what was expected before. It's the techs and capabilities of the fighter that is the important point of the procurement!



False. The number (24) means that the Su-35S are meant to form an exact regiment. That regiment was supposed to be the J-11B but production line changes had it shut down. As of this moment there's nothing on the Su-35S besides the 117S that would interest China. Weapons? China has a whole exceeding variety of them. Avionics? China's J-15/16 and J-11B have L-band AESA radars that have longer range than the Irbis. Engines might be a possibility, but that's it. You can't replace a heavy air superiority fighter with a multirole single engined fighter, nor you can expect to build the newer J-15.



UKBengali said:


> Yes it is - the core technology is the same.
> 
> Anyway it is nigh-on impossible to copy a turbofan engine.
> 
> Otherwise, China would have copied the Al-31 years ago.



Actually, China did copy the Al-31 and produce it under the same name. The WS-10 soon surpassed it though.


----------



## Akasa

Russia has confirmed that the Su-35S has NOT HAPPENED

Russia: No Deal on Sale of Fighters, Subs to China | Defense News | defensenews.com


----------



## sancho

UKBengali said:


> The most logical reason that I have come across so far.



Except that it doesn't make any sense at all, since the Su 35 has hardly anything to do with the Super 30 upgrade. The MKI won't get IRBIS E radar and most likely not the 117S engines.
Also if that would have been the aim, China would have bought the Su 30SM, the Russian version of the MKI, same design (twin seat, canards), same radar, same engine, same TVC features and cheaper. That would be the logical selection as an agressor squad, but that's not the case.




Hu Songshan said:


> The purchase of the Su-35 is most likely for the 117 engines until the WS-15 is ready, WS-10 probably was not adequate for the J-20, on the other hand Ibris is pesa while the J-20 is testing AESA so there is not much need for it.



Depends on the performance of the AESA and the maturity right? Even though PESA might be technologically behind AESA, the performance of the IRBIS E is exceptional. So even IF there are Chinese AESA radars under development yet, it doesn't mean that it would be more capable, nor close to be operational. Infact, even most of the US AESAs can't compete with the IRBIS E, so it's definitely not the worst choice, when you want to improve your radar capabilities.


----------



## Sasquatch

sancho said:


> Depends on the performance of the AESA and the maturity right? Even though PESA might be technologically behind AESA, the performance of the IRBIS E is exceptional. So even IF there are Chinese AESA radars under development yet, it doesn't mean that it would be more capable, nor close to be operational. Infact, even most of the US AESAs can't compete with the IRBIS E, so it's definitely not the worst choice, when you want to improve your radar capabilities.



Correct, but as of now it is there is little to no information on it so we can't compare to the irbis or even the apg77. China is testing a AESA on the J-20, but has not tested the WS-15 on it that is why the 117s is probably desire more, I can see your point on the irbis.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

Russia: No Deal on Sale of Fighters, Subs to China | Defense News | defensenews.com



> . TAIPEI &#8212; Russia is denying Chinese media claims that Moscow and Beijing have signed agreements to sell Russian-made arms and military technology to China, including 24 Su-35 multirole fighter jets and four Amur-class diesel submarines.
> 
> During a recent visit by Chinese President Xi Jinping to Moscow from Friday to Sunday, no discussions took place regarding &#8220;military-technical cooperation&#8221; issues, the ITAR-TASS news agency reported Monday. This was in response to an earlier report by China&#8217;s CCTV on the same day.
> 
> &#8220;The Kremlin is officially denying even discussing arms trade during Xi&#8217;s visit,&#8221; said Vasiliy Kashin, a China military specialist at the Moscow-based Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST). &#8220;In Russia-China relations, specific arms trade contracts are almost never discussed by the top leaders, just the general approaches.&#8221;
> 
> Another defense industry source in Russia said there are strong reservations about going forward on the memorandum of understanding signed in December to explore the sale of the twin-engine Su-35s and Amur submarines to China.
> 
> China intentionally violated intellectual property right (IPR) agreements when it copied and manufactured Russia&#8217;s Su-27 fighter as the J-11B, according to Russia.
> 
> In 1995, China secured a production deal with Russia to build 200 Su-27SKs, dubbed the J-11A, for $2.5 billion for the Shenyang Aircraft Corp. In 2006, Russia canceled the deal after 95 aircraft when it discovered China had reverse-engineered the fighter and was secretly manufacturing an indigenous copy, the J-11B, with Chinese-made avionics and engines.
> 
> There are strong suspicions China will procure the technological know-how of the Su-35 and Amur and simply produce an indigenous version.
> 
> But not all agree. Gary Li, a senior analyst at London-based IHS Fairplay, said China&#8217;s research and development have moved forward.
> 
> &#8220;It no longer will seek to directly reverse engineer everything it buys, but maybe adopt parts of the platform for other projects [and] integrate into domestic designs,&#8221; he said.
> 
> There also are concerns China wants access to the Su-35&#8217;s Saturn AL-117S engine, which is outfitted on the T-50, a prototype of Russia&#8217;s fifth-generation Sukhoi PAK FA stealth fighter.
> 
> However, Kashin said the risks of selling the Russian engine to China are negligible.
> 
> &#8220;An engine cannot be copied by obtaining a sample,&#8221; he said.
> 
> Li said he could envision Chinese aerospace engineers studying the aircraft&#8217;s engine and thrust-vectoring for future inclusion, as well as the Amur sub&#8217;s air-independent propulsion, but it will still be more than a decade before China will stop having to order engines to replace &#8220;worn-out ones,&#8221; as it has been doing with the J-11 and J-10 fighters.
> 
> &#8220;It always takes a few years before they can make a domestic alternative,&#8221; Li said.
> 
> Kashin cautions that a Chinese attempt to copy the Su-35, as they did with the Su-27, would be more difficult, &#8220;because this time, our Ukrainian &#8216;brothers&#8217; cannot help them by selling the Chinese all the technology they lacked for a handful of dollars. I think the Amur situation will be generally the same.&#8221;
> 
> Ukraine has been accused of selling China former Soviet defense technologies, but it has no access to information regarding newer systems, such as the Su-35 and Amur.
> 
> &#8220;The Amur ultimately isn&#8217;t a strategic submarine, and as Russia&#8217;s interests in the Far East are not yet that ambitious, they can afford to sell them to China,&#8221; Li said. &#8220;How better to keep the U.S. pivot off their backs?&#8221;



Sorry to burst china haters bubble again. 

The last time I check www.mod.gov.cn , no news of arm deal signed between Russia and china. Those rumour is as good as dead.


----------



## UKBengali

SinoSoldier said:


> False. The number (24) means that the Su-35S are meant to form an exact regiment. That regiment was supposed to be the J-11B but production line changes had it shut down. As of this moment there's nothing on the Su-35S besides the 117S that would interest China. Weapons? China has a whole exceeding variety of them. Avionics? China's J-15/16 and J-11B have L-band AESA radars that have longer range than the Irbis. Engines might be a possibility, but that's it. You can't replace a heavy air superiority fighter with a multirole single engined fighter, nor you can expect to build the newer J-15.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, *China did copy the Al-31 and produce it under the same name*. The WS-10 soon surpassed it though.




Do you have a source for this?


----------



## Yeti

China has agreed to buy 24 fighter jets and four submarines from Russia, Chinese state media report. 

It is reported to be the first time in a decade that China has made a large-scale military purchase from Russia. 

Two of the submarines will be built in Russia and two in China. 

The deal, signed just before last weekend's visit to Moscow by the Chinese President, Xi Jinping, comes as both sides increase military co-operation. 

Correspondents say Moscow and Beijing are trying to counterbalance what they see as American military dominance.

China is buying 24 Su-35 fighters and four Lada-class submarines, reported the Communist Party organ the People's Daily and China Central Television (CCTV).

They did not put a value on the purchases.

China's official defence budget rose by 11.2% in 2012 - pushing it above $100bn (£65bn) for the first time. But foreign experts have estimated that Beijing's actual military spending could be as much as double the official budget. 

US defence spending was reported as standing at more than $700bn.

Beijing - which is also embroiled in a bitter row over disputed islands with Japan - launched its first aircraft carrier last year.

"The Su-35 fighters can effectively reduce pressure on China's air defence before Chinese-made stealth fighters come online," the People's Daily was quoted as saying.

It said the two countries were expected to co-operate further in developing military technology - including for S-400 long-range anti-aircraft missiles, 117S large thrust engines, IL-476 large transport aircraft and IL-78 aerial tankers.

'Riposte'

Chinese President Xi Jinping visited Moscow from Friday to Sunday for talks with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin - his first trip abroad since becoming head of state earlier this month.

The two countries are also pursuing a number of deals for Russia to supply Chinese industry with oil and liquefied natural gas.

President Xi's visit was lauded by the state-run China Daily as a "well-deserved riposte to Washington for America's military 'pivot' to Asia. Xi is executing China's own 'pivot' - the visit to Moscow to cement ties with" Mr Putin, the paper said.

"Xi's decision to make Moscow the destination of his first official visit as China's president will give the US a sharp reminder that it is not the only power able to flex its muscles," the report, translated by BBC Monitoring, went on.



BBC News - China 'buys fighter jets and submarines from Russia'



 looks like someone people will be eating humble pie including a few mods


----------



## Akasa

And Russia confirms otherwise.

Russia: No Deal on Sale of Fighters, Subs to China | Defense News | defensenews.com

Looks like humble pie shall not be opened.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PITA

SinoSoldier said:


> And Russia denies it
> 
> Russia: No Deal on Sale of Fighters, Subs to China | Defense News | defensenews.com
> 
> Looks like humble pie shall be returned.



LOL I've heard that tastes pretty good with a side of crow.


----------



## Yeti

SinoSoldier said:


> And Russia denies it
> 
> Russia: No Deal on Sale of Fighters, Subs to China | Defense News | defensenews.com
> 
> Looks like humble pie shall be returned.





This is latest news it gonna happen wheres the Chinese fanboys now? who said this will never happen haha one twat even offered a $100 that China will never buy such arms from Russia


----------



## Akasa

Yeti said:


> This is latest news it gonna happen wheres the Chinese fanboys now? who said this will never happen haha one twat even offered a $100 that China will never buy such arms from Russia



Why are you mentioning the money that you have just lost?


----------



## Yeti

SinoSoldier said:


> Why are you mentioning the money that you have just lost?






So are you still in the camp that this deal is not going to happen? I never lost anything I do not bet with Chinese fanboys on pdf


----------



## PITA

If true, maybe it's political in nature.


----------



## siegecrossbow

Although I am mentally prepared to accept the Su-35 deal, I won't believe it until I see Su-35s flying in PLAAF colors.


----------



## Akasa

Yeti said:


> So are you still in the camp that this deal is not going to happen? I never lost anything I do not bet with Chinese fanboys on pdf



Please note that both governments have denied the purchase. Seems like fanboy is a word you need to mutter in a mirror.


----------



## Yeti

siegecrossbow said:


> Although I am mentally prepared to accept the Su-35 deal, I won't believe it until I see Su-35s flying in PLAAF colors.



You will get your hands on the brilliant 117S turbofan engines as well as the radar system so you can start reverse engineering them as you guys do best which btw we could learn from.



SinoSoldier said:


> Please note that both governments have denied the purchase. Seems like fanboy is a word you need to mutter in a mirror.




lol still living in the mode of denial I salute you for your character do not give up hope my friend it might not happen


----------



## Akasa

Yeti said:


> lol still living in the mode of denial I salute you for your character do not give up hope my friend it might not happen



The denial of the purchase has been reverberated by two governments. Meanwhile the rumor of the deal has been circulating the Internet for years on end without any solid evidence, without any credibility. Seems like denial is your case.


----------



## siegecrossbow

Yeti said:


> There is no shame to buy superior weapons, you are doing well but cloning and stealing technology only gets you so far do not beat yourself up about it.



Now here is where we disagree. I don't consider the Su-35 to be a superior weapon. Maybe the engine is superior for the time being. However, there is very little to learn from the radar and avionics.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Yeti

SinoSoldier said:


> The denial of the purchase has been reverberated by two governments. Meanwhile the rumor of the deal has been circulating the Internet for years on end without any solid evidence, without any credibility. Seems like denial is your case.




Talks are ongoing, if you want the words from a direct Russian military person I can give you it. Such deals take ages due to the large scale of the size of the contract where many things have to be agreed such as a tech transfer etc

We can expect further talks when both parties meet during the BRIC summit to iron out such issues.

When the actual deal will be signed is matter of debate but to say there is not advanced talks is not true.


----------



## siegecrossbow

I am of the opinion that some people on this thread will have a field day regardless of what happens.

Possibility #1: China buys the Su-35.

Response: J-20 and J-21 are junks since China is still purchasing a 4+ fighter from Russia despite numerous restrictions.

Possibility #2: China doesn't buy the Su-35.

Response: J-20 and J-21 are still junks because China wanted to buy a 4+ fighter to reverse engineer tech from Russia but is denied the chance to do so.

Either way, those people win.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sasquatch

siegecrossbow said:


> I am of the opinion that some people on this thread will have a field day regardless of what happens.
> 
> Possibility #1: China buys the Su-35.
> 
> Response: J-20 and J-21 are junks since China is still purchasing a 4+ fighter from Russia despite numerous restrictions.
> 
> Possibility #2: China doesn't buy the Su-35.
> 
> Response: J-20 and J-21 are still junks because China wanted to buy a 4+ fighter to reverse engineer tech from Russia but is denied the chance to do so.
> 
> Either way, those people win.



I personally do not see a problem if the SU-35 gets purchased, 117s could be used on the J-20 until the WS-15 is ready. Also to mention the upgraded WS-13 will be installed to the J21/31, both engines are still in development and will take some time, but China will indeed get the last laugh.

Now what of the report of Russia denying it ?


----------



## 帅的一匹

what PLA really interested is 117S, Russia make it availability binding with the procurement of SU35.


----------



## qwerrty

damn, what did tell you. the news sounds fishy.. 

articles quoted cctv and people's daily, but you can't find any news of this at all on their website. now, the russians deny this. coffins nailed shut 
even if cttv reporting it. i still wouldn't take em seriously either. remember those fools using american topgun's video clip as PLAAF training. lol.. the people's daily are no good either at copy/paste stuff from military fan sites..


----------



## Beast

Yeti said:


> There is no shame to buy superior weapons, you are doing well but cloning and stealing technology only gets you so far do not beat yourself up about it.
> 
> 
> You will get your hands on the brilliant 117S turbofan engines as well as the radar system so you can start reverse engineering them as you guys do best which btw we could learn from.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol still living in the mode of denial I salute you for your character do not give up hope my friend it might not happen


They is no pride when you only know how to buy and not to make a single critical important military component? What pride do you have when Russia boss India around and ignoring any signed contract and ask India to pay whatever hike they demand? Did I forget India is impotent to make it that's why it need to swallow pride and accept Russia bully 

China refuse to Russia blackmail of IL-76 deal and instead go for own Y-20. That is called pride.



Yeti said:


> Talks are ongoing, if you want the words from a direct Russian military person I can give you it. Such deals take ages due to the large scale of the size of the contract where many things have to be agreed such as a tech transfer etc
> 
> We can expect further talks when both parties meet during the BRIC summit to iron out such issues.
> 
> When the actual deal will be signed is matter of debate but to say there is not advanced talks is not true.


I can also give you direct sales person statement from Russia that no arm deal with china is signed. Are you disappointed ?  china is still superior to India who is the largest weapon importer  prepare to eat your humble pie.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JohnSeb

rcrmj said:


> lol to the russians``why they keep making up those false news, maybe trying to lure Indians since the russians havent been good at keeping their current biggest costomer happy```



Chinese media confirms the order for fighter jets & submarines...

hahaha...now what you have to say... 

I say LOLZZZ to the Chinese who ridiculed Russia on PDF


----------



## 帅的一匹

It's goverment's decision, why trolling? There must be something on SU35 we need. The political influence of China procuring SU35 is much more significant than the technical one.

Don't tell me Indian is happy when China get SU35.


----------



## JohnSeb

siegecrossbow said:


> I am of the opinion that some people on this thread will have a field day regardless of what happens.
> 
> Possibility #1: China buys the Su-35.
> 
> Response: J-20 and J-21 are junks since China is still purchasing a 4+ fighter from Russia despite numerous restrictions.
> 
> Possibility #2: China doesn't buy the Su-35.
> 
> Response: J-20 and J-21 are still junks because China wanted to buy a 4+ fighter to reverse engineer tech from Russia but is denied the chance to do so.
> 
> Either way, those people win.



I won't say J-20 and J-21 are junks, but don't say that they are the most advanced jet with stealth or whatever in it, that makes it better than F-22 

Everybody knows at what level the J-20 or J-21 will be. So


----------



## 帅的一匹

The most important thing is Russia will not sell China SU35 if we don't have J20.


----------



## JohnSeb

wanglaokan said:


> It's goverment's decision, why trolling? There must be something on SU35 we need. The political influence of China procuring SU35 is much more significant than the technical one.
> 
> Don't tell me Indian is happy when China get SU35.



Yeah but some Chinese members here were making stupid comments when the news first broke out..something like 'LOL to Russians' and stuff. 

Now you see, there is no political but a lot of technical reasons to buy the Su-35, just google a bit.


----------



## selvan33

After A Decade Long Wait, China And Russia Ink 'Super Jet' Military Deal - Forbes

And i think its confirmed now without any doubt.


----------



## 帅的一匹

Peoples' judgement may be influenced by their pride. nothing big to admit we are still behind than Russian in some area, but we are still good one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## siegecrossbow

JohnSeb said:


> I won't say J-20 and J-21 are junks, but don't say that they are the most advanced jet with stealth or whatever in it, that makes it better than F-22
> 
> Everybody knows at what level the J-20 or J-21 will be. So



Going by your logic pak-fa isn't that great either because India purchased Rafales.


----------



## 帅的一匹

Why India choose to buy Rafale if MKI is so mighty? when you have the anwser then you will understand why China buy SU35.


----------



## JohnSeb

siegecrossbow said:


> Going by your logic pak-fa isn't that great either because India purchased Rafales.



My logic?? really!! when did I post my logic here?? 

It's all made up by you & going by yours J-20 & J-21 aren't that great because China is purchasing Su-35


----------



## 帅的一匹

&#33258;&#20449;&#26159;&#19968;&#20010;&#20255;&#22823;&#27665;&#26063;&#24212;&#26377;&#30340;&#27668;&#36136;&#65292;&#20294;&#36807;&#20998;&#33258;&#20449;&#23601;&#26159;&#19968;&#31181;&#19981;&#33258;&#20449;&#30340;&#34920;&#29616;&#12290;we should pay due respect to Russia made weapon system.


----------



## JohnSeb

wanglaokan said:


> Why India choose to buy Rafale if MKI is so mighty? when you have the anwser then you will understand why China buy SU35.



Rafale is for filling the gap between our future LCA & Su-30 MKI, it will replace the phased out/aging MIG's.
India already has MKI in large numbers, we chose to buy Rafale coz it's a good fighter jet & we have the $$$


----------



## kurup

wanglaokan said:


> Why India choose to buy Rafale if MKI is so mighty? when you have the anwser then you will understand why China buy SU35.



MKI and Rafale both are 4G fighters belonging to different classes and we don't have anything in either class under developement.

But that still doesnot answer why china is buying Su35


----------



## john.mccainn

JohnSeb said:


> My logic?? really!! when did I post my logic here??
> 
> It's all made up by you & going by yours J-20 & J-21 aren't that great because China is purchasing Su-35



at least china had a capabilities to make stealth jet plane,and can sell an airplane 
not just buy and use. 
rinse repeat ......


----------



## kurup

This is becoming funnier day by day ......

Earlier it used to be Russians talking about the purchase and chinese denying it .

Now the condition reversed and Chinese are talking about the purchase and Russians denying it


----------



## 帅的一匹

JohnSeb said:


> Rafale is for filling the gap between our future LCA & Su-30 MKI, it will replace the phased out/aging MIG's.
> India already has MKI in large numbers, we chose to buy Rafale coz it's a good fighter jet & we have the $$$


We have to face F35 and F22 in the coming years in Asian pacific region, SU35 will make our PLAAF stronger. We need 117S engine of SU35, a big thrust engine with TVC. Same to you guys, we are filling the gap cause J20 will be ready only after year 2018.

our pressure is mammoth!

India has much better internationl surrouding than China, hope you will understand.



kurup said:


> MKI and Rafale both are 4G fighters belonging to different classes and we don't have anything in either class under developement.
> 
> But that still doesnot answer why china is buying Su35



SU35 is better than any fighter we have in PLAAF inventory now before J20 induction. The SU35 will be deloyed at east part of China to deal with our enemy.


----------



## JohnSeb

wanglaokan said:


> We have to face F35 and F22 in the coming years in Asian pacific region, SU35 will make our PLAAF stronger. We need 117S engine of SU35, a big thrust engine with TVC. Same to you guys, we are filling the gap cause J20 will be ready only after year 2018.
> 
> our pressure is mammoth!
> 
> India has much better internationl surrouding than China, hope you will understand.
> 
> 
> 
> SU35 is better than any fighter we have in PLAAF inventory now before J20 induction. The SU35 will be deloyed at east part of China to deal with our enemy.




An honest answer. I understand. I didn't mean to offend you or China.


----------



## Akasa

wanglaokan said:


> SU35 is better than any fighter we have in PLAAF inventory now before J20 induction. The SU35 will be deloyed at east part of China to deal with our enemy.



The Su-35 is pretty on par with the AESA-upgraded J-11Bs and also the new J-15 and J-16. I can see no other role for the Su-35 in the PLAAF besides aggressor simulation.



selvan33 said:


> After A Decade Long Wait, China And Russia Ink 'Super Jet' Military Deal - Forbes
> 
> And i think its confirmed now without any doubt.



Sorry, but that's just the same old article that's been circulating. The article was later denied by the Russian military.


----------



## JohnSeb

john.mccainn said:


> at least china had a capabilities to make stealth jet plane,and can sell an airplane
> not just buy and use.
> rinse repeat ......



Yes your highness!!! China truly have the capability to make stealth jet plane .

Sell an airplane, we know which countries buys them and the reason for that.

FYI we also have sold Helos to other countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

JohnSeb said:


> Chinese media confirms the order for fighter jets & submarines...
> 
> hahaha...now what you have to say...
> 
> I say LOLZZZ to the Chinese who ridiculed Russia on PDF



Sorry, you don't have the last laugh yet.

Russia: No Deal on Sale of Fighters, Subs to China | Defense News | defensenews.com


----------



## john.mccainn

JohnSeb said:


> Yes your highness!!! China truly have the capability to make stealth jet plane .
> 
> Sell an airplane, we know which countries buys them and the reason for that.
> 
> *FYI we also have sold Helos to other countries.*



lol please pls concern about your tejas first then you can talk on china !
oh really can you tell me what kind helos you sold ?


----------



## qwerrty

SinoSoldier said:


> Sorry, you don't have the last laugh yet.
> 
> Russia: No Deal on Sale of Fighters, Subs to China | Defense News | defensenews.com



now the kremlin is denying it. this whole thing is a joke. the rumour just bounces around like basketball by media, while both governments denying..


----------



## shuttler

These kind of news are good for defense forum traffics none the less.

I have heard the deal was about US$3.5 billion. We can still afford it while giving much due respect to other budgetary needs. If Russia doesnt sell, that is fine. It is not the end of the world.


----------



## kurup

wanglaokan said:


> SU35 is better than any fighter we have in PLAAF inventory now before J20 induction. The SU35 will be deloyed at east part of China to deal with our enemy.



According to some chinese members Su35 is not better and is comparable to J11B.The logical decision will be to procure more J11B. So why buying Su35 ??


----------



## JohnSeb

john.mccainn said:


> lol please pls concern about your tejas first then you can talk on china !
> oh really can you tell me what kind helos you sold ?



Oh so you wanna talk about Tejas, you go and get concerned about J-11 & J-20 & J-21 & stop buying from Russians if your tech is that good... 

Check Wiki for Dhruv helicopter


----------



## 帅的一匹

kurup said:


> According to some chinese members Su35 is not better and is comparable to J11B.The logical decision will be to procure more J11B. So why buying Su35 ??


Only Chairman Xi jin ping knows the lowdown, ask him next time he visit India.


----------



## selvan33

SinoSoldier said:


> The Su-35 is pretty on par with the AESA-upgraded J-11Bs and also the new J-15 and J-16. I can see no other role for the Su-35 in the PLAAF besides aggressor simulation.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but that's just the same old article that's been circulating. The article was later denied by the Russian military.



hey dude but that article was posted in forbes few hours before only. And i am confused in this matter because everyone is giving a different information about this deal. Are you actually going to buy these su 35 and Amur class/lada class or not.


----------



## 帅的一匹

Maybe he is receiving kickback.


----------



## kurup

wanglaokan said:


> Only Chairman Xi jin ping knows the lowdown, ask him next time he visit India.



That is a lame answer .........


----------



## 帅的一匹

kurup said:


> That is a lame answer .........


you have already had your anwser in your heart, so don't need to ask it again.


----------



## kurup

wanglaokan said:


> you have already had your anwser in your heart, so don't need to ask it again.



If I had answer , I would have wrote it earlier rather than discussing.I don't that is why I am asking you .

Similar to Su35 , why is china buying Amur ?? You already have developed the yuan , song and qing class ssk.


----------



## Beast

kurup said:


> According to some chinese members Su35 is not better and is comparable to J11B.The logical decision will be to procure more J11B. So why buying Su35 ??



Becos we are not buying Su-35. Kremlin has denied any deal conducted. J-16 still truimph Su-35. You can't get over it?


----------



## JohnSeb

Beast said:


> Becos we are not buying Su-35. Kremlin has denied any deal conducted. J-16 still truimph Su-35. You can't get over it?



Yep, J-16 must be damn superior than Su-35!! and that's why you're buying lot of Su-35. Its reported in your national media as well, but seems you still find it hard to digest


----------



## kurup

Beast said:


> Becos we are not buying Su-35. Kremlin has denied any deal conducted. J-16 still truimph Su-35. You can't get over it?



I don't care if you buy it or not . This is what I wrote earlier 



> This is becoming funnier day by day ......
> 
> Earlier it used to be Russians talking about the purchase and chinese denying it .
> 
> Now the condition reversed and Chinese are talking about the purchase and Russians denying it


----------



## 3Idiots

sancho said:


> Except that it doesn't make any sense at all, since the Su 35 has hardly anything to do with the Super 30 upgrade. The MKI won't get IRBIS E radar and most likely not the 117S engines.
> *Also if that would have been the aim, China would have bought the Su 30SM, the Russian version of the MKI, same design (twin seat, canards), same radar, same engine, same TVC features *and cheaper. That would be the logical selection as an agressor squad, but that's not the case.



China can't buy Su-30SM because it contains Indian components. 

http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian...ore-order-procuring-34-radar-computers-2.html

Replacement may be possible, but they won't be as good.. else Russia won't have bought them from India in the first place.

Further, Su-35 doesn't simulate Su-30MKI since it evolved from Su-27, not from Su-30.

And capability enhancements in Su-30MKI meant inclusion of Indian Avionics, some Israeli pods (litening pod) and some French components too.

That's why Su-30MKI is 4.5 gen, while the base version Su-30 (including Su-30MKK) is only 4 gen.


----------



## Ammyy

siegecrossbow said:


> Going by your logic pak-fa isn't that great either because India purchased Rafales.



Rafale is multirole fighter and PAKFA will be airsuperity so no comparison btw two.


----------



## qwerrty

JohnSeb said:


> Yep, J-16 must be damn superior than Su-35!! and that's why you're buying lot of Su-35. Its reported in your national media as well, but seems you still find it hard to digest



chinese media also says that j11b is superior than su-35 and j-20 is better than pakfa and f-22 too. now choose which one that suits you 




Ammyy said:


> Rafale is multirole fighter and PAKFA will be airsuperity so no comparison btw two.



define multirole? lol pakfa designed from beginning to be air superiority and can do other mission roles as well. need to check your facts again. 


http://www.google.com.au/#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=pakfa+multirole&oq=pakfa+multirole&gs_l=hp.12...5124.10445.1.11188.10.10.0.0.0.0.1502.6221.2-2j0j1j1j4j0j1.9.0...0.0...1c.1.7.psy-ab.rnqVfFZK4DU&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.44158598,d.dGY&fp=328cf8755ea3cb88&biw=1280&bih=834


----------



## JohnSeb

qwerrty said:


> chinese media also says that j11b is superior than su-35 and j-20 is better than pakfa and f-22 too. now choose which one that suits you



The news about China buying Su-35 might be true actually as there is no need for Chinese media to report it falsely  unlike its Fighter Jets & Weapons which are always 'The best in the World'.


----------



## BDforever

The news is true , Bangladeshi news channels reported about it


----------



## qwerrty

BDforever said:


> The news is true , Bangladeshi news channels reported about it



lol

..........


----------



## BDforever

qwerrty said:


> lol
> 
> ..........



???? 

24 Su 35 and 4 LADA Class submarines according to news report


----------



## qwerrty

BDforever said:


> ????
> 
> 24 Su 35 and 4 LADA Class submarines according to news report



it just reporting on another report that reporting another report on and on...


this thread gonna be bumped up later on for laugh like that arresting gear


----------



## sancho

3Idiots said:


> Replacement may be possible, but they won't be as good.. else Russia won't have bought them from India in the first place.



Of course China can buy them, since Russia can sell them BARS with the original Russian systems as well, or simply take some from the IRBIS E. India can't to anything about it, only to deny Indian parts.




3Idiots said:


> Further, Su-35 doesn't simulate Su-30MKI since it evolved from Su-27, not from Su-30.



MKI = Su 30MK INDIA
MKM = Su 30MK Malaysia

So it's a varient of the Su 30MK




3Idiots said:


> That's why Su-30MKI is 4.5 gen, while the base version Su-30 (including Su-30MKK) is only 4 gen.



Not really, the main difference are the Russian features like the BARS PESA radar, compared to the puls doppler radars in the MKK, or the canards / TVNs for increased maneuverability which sets it appart. The customisations with India, French or Israeli stuff a minor differences in that regard.



Ammyy said:


> Rafale is multirole fighter and PAKFA will be airsuperity so no comparison btw two.



Any fighter that can be used in A2A and A2G roles is a multi role fighter, the differences are only how balanced the design and capabilities are for both roles, or how specialised the fighter is for one of the roles. 



SinoSoldier said:


> The Su-35 is pretty on par with the AESA-upgraded J-11Bs and also the new J-15 and J-16. I can see no other role for the Su-35 in the PLAAF besides aggressor simulation.



Maybe you want to post reliable specs of the J11B, to compare it to the Su 35, then you might get a better idea of the differences.


----------



## zandubam

Beijing and Moscow have signed two
contracts for China to buy Russian
fighter jets and submarines.
China Central Television reported
that the purchase deals were signed
before President Xi Jinpings just-
concluded visit to Russia, China Daily
reported Tuesday.
The purchases represented the first
time in nearly 10 years that China
had bought large military
technological equipment from
Russia, the report said.
The four submarines will be jointly
designed and built by both
countries, with two of them to be
built in Russia and the other two in
China.
The Su-35 fighters can effectively
reduce pressure on Chinas air
defense before Chinese-made stealth
fighters come online, the report
said.


----------



## djsjs

anything big enough to open a new thread?
true or not,only 24 planes ,about 1% of China airforce.
and they would be in east China,thousands miles away from your motherland.dont worry.no wars in near future.
only 24.......only 1%

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cnleio

buy 24x Su-35 is just a normal deal, buy 240x Su-35 that's a big enough deal in China.
RELAX

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

Sorry, nothing is comfirmed. The CCTV just recycle the rumour float around the net. Kremlin has denied any of this deal. Rosoboronexport has not make any statement. Same as MOD of China. You can check out their website. If any deal is signed, they are the official spokesmen to announce the news.

Russia: No Deal on Sale of Fighters, Subs to China | Defense News | defensenews.com



> Russia is denying Chinese media claims that Moscow and Beijing have signed agreements to sell Russian-made arms and military technology to China, including 24 Su-35 multirole fighter jets and four Amur-class diesel submarines.
> 
> During a recent visit by Chinese President Xi Jinping to Moscow from Friday to Sunday, no discussions took place regarding &#8220;military-technical cooperation&#8221; issues, the ITAR-TASS news agency reported Monday. This was in response to an earlier report by China&#8217;s CCTV on the same day.
> 
> &#8220;The Kremlin is officially denying even discussing arms trade during Xi&#8217;s visit,&#8221; said Vasiliy Kashin, a China military specialist at the Moscow-based Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST). &#8220;In Russia-China relations, specific arms trade contracts are almost never discussed by the top leaders, just the general approaches.&#8221;
> 
> Another defense industry source in Russia said there are strong reservations about going forward on the memorandum of understanding signed in December to explore the sale of the twin-engine Su-35s and Amur submarines to China.
> 
> China intentionally violated intellectual property right (IPR) agreements when it copied and manufactured Russia&#8217;s Su-27 fighter as the J-11B, according to Russia.
> 
> In 1995, China secured a production deal with Russia to build 200 Su-27SKs, dubbed the J-11A, for $2.5 billion for the Shenyang Aircraft Corp. In 2006, Russia canceled the deal after 95 aircraft when it discovered China had reverse-engineered the fighter and was secretly manufacturing an indigenous copy, the J-11B, with Chinese-made avionics and engines.
> 
> There are strong suspicions China will procure the technological know-how of the Su-35 and Amur and simply produce an indigenous version.
> 
> But not all agree. Gary Li, a senior analyst at London-based IHS Fairplay, said China&#8217;s research and development have moved forward.
> 
> &#8220;It no longer will seek to directly reverse engineer everything it buys, but maybe adopt parts of the platform for other projects [and] integrate into domestic designs,&#8221; he said.
> 
> There also are concerns China wants access to the Su-35&#8217;s Saturn AL-117S engine, which is outfitted on the T-50, a prototype of Russia&#8217;s fifth-generation Sukhoi PAK FA stealth fighter.
> 
> However, Kashin said the risks of selling the Russian engine to China are negligible.
> 
> &#8220;An engine cannot be copied by obtaining a sample,&#8221; he said.
> 
> Li said he could envision Chinese aerospace engineers studying the aircraft&#8217;s engine and thrust-vectoring for future inclusion, as well as the Amur sub&#8217;s air-independent propulsion, but it will still be more than a decade before China will stop having to order engines to replace &#8220;worn-out ones,&#8221; as it has been doing with the J-11 and J-10 fighters.
> 
> &#8220;It always takes a few years before they can make a domestic alternative,&#8221; Li said.
> 
> Kashin cautions that a Chinese attempt to copy the Su-35, as they did with the Su-27, would be more difficult, &#8220;because this time, our Ukrainian &#8216;brothers&#8217; cannot help them by selling the Chinese all the technology they lacked for a handful of dollars. I think the Amur situation will be generally the same.&#8221;
> 
> Ukraine has been accused of selling China former Soviet defense technologies, but it has no access to information regarding newer systems, such as the Su-35 and Amur.
> 
> &#8220;The Amur ultimately isn&#8217;t a strategic submarine, and as Russia&#8217;s interests in the Far East are not yet that ambitious, they can afford to sell them to China,&#8221; Li said. &#8220;How better to keep the U.S. pivot off their backs?&#8221;


----------



## djsjs

haha,the story of China buy su35 will go on


----------



## djsjs

Akash A. said:


> You do recognise how much of the left over 99% is the submation of hundreds of 3rd generation junks that barely fly ?


i do know that the 99% junks are nightmare of many enemies,haha,calm down.you need to think twice before speak


----------



## Yogi

i m sick of these 24 SU35 threads...

Plz wait for some official confirmation from Chinese side...


----------



## Beast

3Idiots said:


> Is it worth being jealous of ?



THat question needs to be ask at your compatriot. Look at previous post and see how this thread turns into a flame thread.

But PLAAF is definitely a airforce everybody envy. It got a big paycheck while many other airforce got a fee cut. And every new advance things pop out quickly for PLAAF.

Next generation SRAAM PL-10






Fifth Generation fighter SRAAM arming and unarming process/mechanism





I am not sure how many airforce can do or afford that?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Peregrine

By spreading these rumours Indians just want to prove that Chinese own fighter jets are inferior, therefore China is going for 24 Russian birds, but same logic is not applicable when Bharut opts for 126 Rafales despite having super-duper MKI's.....


----------



## Rocky25

Peregrine said:


> By spreading these rumours Indians just want to prove that Chinese own fighter jets are inferior, therefore China is going for 24 Russian birds, but same logic is not applicable when Bharut opts for 126 Rafales despite having super-duper MKI's.....



Let us leave the Chinese buying Su 35 for now..... As there is NO credible news from either side.

FYI.... Sukoi 30 MKI is a Air Superiority fighter and Rafales are Multi-role fighter... If you cannot understand the difference... then good luck!


----------



## 3Idiots

Peregrine said:


> By spreading these rumours Indians just want to prove that Chinese own fighter jets are inferior, therefore China is going for 24 Russian birds, but same logic is not applicable when Bharut opts for 126 Rafales despite having super-duper MKI's.....



Now this is indeed being jealous ..... damn.. nobody is spreading rumours that Pakistan is buying 48 F-16s or 36 Eurofighters. 

(off course, Pakistan doesn't need them.. its buying them only for political reasons. )

We need to give more news space to Pakistan.. for sure.


----------



## Peregrine

3Idiots said:


> Now this is indeed being jealous ..... damn.. nobody is spreading rumours that Pakistan is buying 48 F-16s or 36 Eurofighters.
> 
> (off course, Pakistan doesn't need them.. its buying them only for political reasons. )
> 
> We need to give more news space to Pakistan.. for sure.


Cant reason with your own twisted logic now cant you.......look around this is like a gazillionth thread created by a bhaarti to further the delusional subjectivity over some thing which isnt even officially confirmed by the concerned parties. PAF doesnt need EF's to counter the junk from the eastern side....our Jf-17 and F-16s are sufficient to keep IAF on a tight leash.
You dont have to do anything for Pakistan just dont troll on a PAKISTANI DEFENSE FORUM.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Beast said:


> Sorry, nothing is comfirmed. The CCTV just recycle the rumour float around the net. Kremlin has denied any of this deal. Rosoboronexport has not make any statement. Same as MOD of China. You can check out their website. If any deal is signed, they are the official spokesmen to announce the news.
> 
> Russia: No Deal on Sale of Fighters, Subs to China | Defense News | defensenews.com



Our media is just a bunch of military illiterate, their knowledge about military should be improved in the future.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JohnSeb

qwerrty said:


> it just reporting on another report that reporting another report on and on...
> 
> 
> this thread gonna be bumped up later on for laugh like that arresting gear





Seems like this guy will believe only when the Chinese Premier calls him personally and says...'Son, we really are buying the Russian stuff, you can stop being an idiot in front of these people'

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ammyy

Loki said:


> You never know....
> 
> RAW agents are probably spreading this news for the past.....how many years again?
> 
> That's right! RAW agents are trolling! They are masters of propaganda and information warfare.
> 
> Source: Experience



That means RAW now bought Chinese mainstream news sites??


----------



## Zabaniyah

Ammyy said:


> That means RAW now bought Chinese mainstream news sites??



Yeah...very likely! 

D'oh never mind, I just kidding


----------



## danger007

Ammyy said:


> That means RAW now bought Chinese mainstream news sites??




be aware he is intel mod/// from mighty BD...

I think china will get rid off the Engine problems... with more powerful version of SU-35


----------



## Beast

JohnSeb said:


> Seems like this guy will believe only when the Chinese Premier calls him personally and says...'Son, we really are buying the Russian stuff, you can stop being an idiot in front of these people'



Rosobenexport and MOD china once confirmed the news, we will accept it. Nothing is confirmed yet.


----------



## shuttler

Many media have reported the deal is real.

Check them out. All of their reportings stay. 

Welcome to Forbes

BBC News - China 'buys fighter jets and submarines from Russia'

Russia sells fighter jets and submarines to China - Syracuse Politics | Examiner.com

None of them have withdrawn the above reports


----------



## j20blackdragon

24 fighters are like one squadron.

Why is this a big deal?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 26-K

Let's all stay calm people, no need to get overly agitated.

Me personally, I am waiting for responses or statements from the Chinese Ministry of Defense as there seems to conflicting reports about the authenticity of the deal. What I'm seeing is just news reports sourcing each other which can all be traced to the original Russian source,(Even the Chinese Websites) which raises doubt about the validity of the deal given the sometimes dubious nature of Russian media. 

And for the future, please don't use BBC as a source as they have been shown to be unreliable concerning military news in the past


----------



## ashok321

Russia: No Deal on Sale of Fighters, Subs to China

Russia: No Deal on Sale of Fighters, Subs to China | Defense News | defensenews.com


----------



## 帅的一匹

Incorporate the Su35's forte into J20 development is the purpose we buy it. No matter how others trolling at their best, we should know what actually we need.


----------



## siegecrossbow

I can't believe that this is actually happening... However the Chinese Defense Secretary already confirmed the deal. 48 fighters delivered in two batches. First in June 2015 and the second, with AESA and avionics upgrades, in July 2017.

Link to the story:

People's Daily: Su35 deal confirmed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Agnostic_Indian

fist victim..

first victim..


----------



## UKBengali

LOL. 2nd victim now.


----------



## indian_foxhound

3rd .......


----------



## ExtraOdinary

TO HELL WITH YOU


----------



## OrionHunter

Ooooops!


----------



## SamantK

How many damn threads!


----------



## qwerrty

........


----------



## Fsjal

Dbsheisjsjakajdhfl,ejxjxbuxbdbchcudnsiaoaoanajan


----------



## zzzz

PARIS, June 17 (Itar-Tass) - Russia will supply a series of new multirole fights, Su-35, to China in compliance with a contract, which should be prepared by the yearend, an official of the Russian Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation told Itar-Tass on Monday.

Russias delegation takes part in the Paris Air Show, Le Bourget 2013.

A decision to supply the Su-35 fighters to China was taken long ago. The parties work hard to coordinate financial and technical conditions of the future contract, which is due to be prepared by the yearend. At present, the details of the contract are being specified. Upcoming supplies of the Su-35 fighters to China are an open secret. It is not clear yet what none talks about it in public, the official said.

The Federal Service declined to comment on Russian possible supplies of fighters to China. I dont want to talk about it, director of the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation Alexander Fomin told Itar-Tass.


ITAR-TASS : Russia, China prepare contract on Su-35 supplies


----------



## cnleio

How many Su-35 to China, 24x or 48x ? And when Russia will deliver 1st Su-35 fighter to China ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 26-K

Oh my god not again.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Secur

I need a Chinese source , this time .


----------



## Nishan_101

I think China may buy just because they might need some better fighters now to counter the growing threat from NATO and INDIA in combine...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rcrmj

this buying 35 thing is nowadays called the 'period news' in Chinese forums````just like the period a woman has which comes in certain amount of time````

so my 1000RMB bet is still pending on CJDBY forum

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## nomi007

get ready for new series of j-35
like j-11
l


----------



## Akasa

Nishan_101 said:


> I think China may buy just because they might need some better fighters now to counter the growing threat from NATO and INDIA in combine...



Why would they need it when their J-15 and J-16 emulates the specifications of the Russian counterpart?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kompromat

Maybe Engines?????

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## A.Rafay

nomi007 said:


> get ready for new series of j-35
> like j-11
> l



You think China is buying to copy this aircraft? didnt Russia warned china not to copy?


----------



## shuttler

A.Rafay said:


> You think China is buying to copy this aircraft? didnt Russia warned china not to copy?



is this the first time that China is buying weapons from russia, our pakistani member?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## A.Rafay

shuttler said:


> is this the first time that China is buying weapons from russia, our pakistani member?



No, its not the first time, china is a old customer of russian weapons.


----------



## shuttler

A.Rafay said:


> No, its not the first time, china is a old customer of russian weapons.



China is an old customer of Russian weapons - correct absolutely

I think the issues of property rights will be taken care of between us! Thanks for your concern


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

A.Rafay said:


> You think China is buying to copy this aircraft? didnt Russia warned china not to copy?



With J-20 and J-31, I can confidently said China will do better than just copy and paste, we can absorb new technologies and make it better. If China is interested on Su-35....mean there is something that is valuable otherwise why bother spending billions dollars...only time will tell the true story.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## That Guy

shuttler said:


> China is an old customer of Russian weapons - correct absolutely
> 
> I think the issues of property rights will be taken care of between us! Thanks for your concern



lol, don't take this the wrong way, but it almost sounded like you were personally involved in this.

On a serious note, this is a DISCUSSION forum for everyone. If he wants to bring up the IP issues between China and Russia, as long as it relates to the thread, he's allowed to do just that.



Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> With J-20 and J-31, I can confidently said China will do better than just copy and paste, we can absorb new technologies and make it better. If China is interested on Su-35....mean there is something that is valuable otherwise why bother spending billions dollars...only time will tell the true story.



It's the engines.

while no one expects China to copy Russia tech this time around, they'll probably take the engines apart and see implement what they learn in their own domestic engines. China's domestic engine dev is too far along for China to start trying to clone Russian engines now. They're only using it as a learning tool, kind of like cutting open a frog during a biology class.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

That Guy said:


> It's the engines.
> 
> while no one expects China to copy Russia tech this time around, they'll probably take the engines apart and see implement what they learn in their own domestic engines. China's domestic engine dev is too far along for China to start trying to clone Russian engines now. They're only using it as a learning tool, kind of like cutting open a frog during a biology class.



The 117S engine has nothing to do with either J-20 and J-31, next time don't throw any groundless statement here.

Without the official purchase confirmation from China's ministry of national defence, this news means nothing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## That Guy

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The 117S engine has nothing to do with either J-20 and J-31, next time don't throw any groundless statement here.
> 
> Without the official purchase confirmation from China's ministry of national defence, this news means nothing.



I never mentioned the J-20, nor did I mention the J-31. I think it's you that should not be throwing around groundless statements, because I sure ain't.

I'm not really saying that they're actually buying the damn planes, I'm simply speculating why China would be interested in the Su-35. I'm not the only one who thinks this way, this thought is pretty wide spread. All you need to do is a simple google search to see what I mean.

It's no secret that China is having problems with it's engine development, especially quality control. The 117 engines would help save China's R&D departments a lot of time and money in the long run.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

That Guy said:


> I never mentioned the J-20, nor did I mention the J-31. I think it's you that should not be throwing around groundless statements, because I sure ain't.
> 
> I'm not really saying that they're actually buying the damn planes, I'm simply speculating why China would be interested in the Su-35. I'm not the only one who thinks this way, this thought is pretty wide spread. All you need to do is a simple google search to see what I mean.
> 
> It's no secret that China is having problems with it's engine development, especially quality control. The 117 engines would help save China's R&D departments a lot of time and money in the long run.



The twin 117S engines will be too large to fit into our J-31, which is now waiting for the twin medium thrust WS-13A engines.

Furthermore, the 117S engine derived from the AL-31F engine, it has not bloodline connection with our WS-10 engine, it is useless for us to reverse engineering these engines over again.

Our WS-10 engine is on the way of maturization, and the WS-15 engine is up to test, i don't think we need to copy any Russian engine, we do need the Russian engine serves as a back up when some of our engines are ready for mass production.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## shuttler

That Guy said:


> lol, don't take this the wrong way, but it almost sounded like you were personally involved in this.
> 
> On a serious note, this is a DISCUSSION forum for everyone. If he wants to bring up the IP issues between China and Russia, as long as it relates to the thread, he's allowed to do just that



Of course he has everything in his mind to say it but it sounds ridiculous, and so are you

You are saying as if a guy's walking into a bank and you tell the banker to inform the police for robbery

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Lone

Its the engine chinese are after, nothing else.


----------



## shuttler

If someone can lay out the table of comparison between Su-35 and our fighter jets then we may know if the purpose of buying Su-35 fit into a particular vacuum of our airforce

If we are just buying 1 or 2 squadrons, how much do these engine adequately offer themselves as backup for our fighter jets?


----------



## Fsjal

The PLAAF probably bought these planes because Russia has no customers yet, and if China bought these planes, Sukhoi and the Russian government might get happy. 

Anyway, the J-15 and J-16 already have capabilities matching to the Su-35.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Lone said:


> Its the engine chinese are after, nothing else.



The finalized version of J-20 can't even be qualified as a 5th gen fighter if it is using the 117S engine, which is 100% impossible.



Fsjal said:


> The PLAAF probably bought these planes because Russia has no customers yet, and if China bought these planes, Sukhoi and the Russian government might get happy.
> 
> Anyway, the J-15 and J-16 already have capabilities matching to the Su-35.



True, Russia is desperate to sell their Su-35 with any pre-condition.

They will die in happiness even we do buy and reverse engineering their Su-35, but now the problem is, would we truly buy their Su-35 and spend time to reverse engineering it? 

http://www.ruaviation.com/news/2013/5/20/1688/

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cnleio

The Su-35 is a good 3.5-gen fighter, it's truth. 
If China can buy some, it's NICE ! I wish the number is 48+1, one for research in China SAC. Specially do not forget Russia export other 98x 117S / AL-41 jet engines to China !







Before PLAAF pilots to fly J-20 / J-31 or any 4-gen fighters, they can get training by flying Su-35 fighters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

cnleio said:


> The Su-35 is a good 3.5-gen fighter, it's truth.
> If China can buy some, it's NICE ! I wish the number is 48+1, one for research in China SAC. Specially do not forget Russia export other 98x 117S / AL-41 jet engines to China !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Before PLAAF pilots to fly J-20 / J-31 or any 4-gen fighters, they can get training by flying Su-35 fighters.



Waste of money, there is no fcking way that we would buy it if it costs $100 million each.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Roybot

I would like to take this opportunity to bring up this Su-35 Charity Challenge thread. 

http://www.defence.pk/forums/chinese-defence/163901-su-35-charity-challenge-thread.html


----------



## Beast

Even the Russia official dont want to talk about the deal. What is there to talk abt?


----------



## qwerrty

Beast said:


> Even the Russia official dont want to talk about the deal. What is there to talk abt?



it thought the deal signed gazillion times already given the number of threads posted here by indians. now, that official guy seems like he's not even sure..


----------



## cnleio

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Waste of money, there is no fcking way that we would buy it if it costs $100 million each.



LOL, still better than J-11B and J-10A. Su-35 is a good fighter.


----------



## Globenim

Don't we already have enough SU-35? I mean we allegedly keep buying and signing these deals about twice every month for entire batches of SU-35 since 2011.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PRC2025

zzzz said:


> PARIS, June 17 (Itar-Tass) - Russia will supply a series of new multirole fights, Su-35, to China in compliance with a contract, which should be prepared by the yearend, an official of the Russian Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation told Itar-Tass on Monday.
> 
> Russia&#8217;s delegation takes part in the Paris Air Show, Le Bourget 2013.
> 
> &#8220;A decision to supply the Su-35 fighters to China was taken long ago. The parties work hard to coordinate financial and technical conditions of the future contract, which is due to be prepared by the yearend. At present, the details of the contract are being specified. Upcoming supplies of the Su-35 fighters to China are &#8216;an open secret&#8217;. It is not clear yet what none talks about it in public,&#8221; the official said.
> 
> The Federal Service declined to comment on Russian possible supplies of fighters to China. &#8220;I don&#8217;t want to talk about it,&#8221; director of the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation Alexander Fomin told Itar-Tass.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My reply:
> 
> I think this time that the rumor is true and that this deal is real. After all, they both want to agree on details, which I think they are working on right now. There is no doubt this time that the deal most likely is real, but they need to work out details by the end of this year, thus they don't want to talk about something which is "not ready" yet, but it soon will be.
> 
> I think is good that China buys 24 Su-35, it would be good for PLAAF and it would be good for the strategic partnership and alliance between Russia and China, especially through SCO. It would also signal that Russia has no problem with selling one of the best weapons they have, so that's good.
> 
> I know it has also been some talk about 4 Lada/Amur-class SSK, and if that's true, it would be even better.
> 
> I really don't understand some of the unwillingness among some members in this thread regarding this deal.
> 
> I know that J-15 and J-16 are also very good, and that Improved Kilos, Song, Yuan/Improved Yuan-class etc are also great, but that's not the point.
> 
> We need to look at the other way around, and not talk about thing China has that is comparable to what Su-35 and Lada-class is. The key point here is that PLAAF and PLAN are still flying ancient J-7 and J-8 fighters and ancient Ming-class SSK are still in service. They need to go out of service, like NOW, lol
> And I definitely don't mind replacing 150 J-7 with 24 Su-35, and I don't mind seing 10 Ming-class going straight to garbage, and being replaced by 4 Lada-class. Heck, I would even be happy with another 4 Improved Kilo-class.
> 
> So I am at least very happy if the deal turns out to be true, which it finally seems that it is, it starts to make more sence and Su-35 has also started to serve in the RuAF, which was not the case before, so it gives one opportunity to see it in "action", and not just in theory.
Click to expand...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## shuttler

@PRC2025 

Good post!

Do you have an idea how much is each of the Su-35 and the Lada/Amur-class SSK costing us?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PRC2025

shuttler said:


> @PRC2025
> 
> Good post!
> 
> Do you have an idea how much is each of the Su-35 and the Lada/Amur-class SSK costing us?



Thanks! I am sure they are negotiating about the price, since that is one of the most fundamental parts of a deal of course. So I won't speculate what it is going to cost, but I am sure they will agree as they said by this year's end. China has a lot of cash, and should buy this.

Each time I see a fine Chinese pilot in a J-7, I just wanna throw up. The same goes for J-8. This is not kind of fighters China should be flying in 2013 or 2014 or onwards. 

Seeing also Ming-class SSK in service does basically makes me physically ill. 

So we should not complain at all having Su-35 or Amur-class SSK coming our way. After all, PLAAF and PLAN deserve the best, and I don't think we need to discuss what is better between J7/J8 on one side and Su-35 on the other side. 

It would be like complaining if Russia was to sell us T-90 MBT. Sure we have T-99 and T-96 upgrades which are among top 12 in the world, but still most of MBTs are T-59. So once again, no need to discuss what is better between T-59 and T-90, lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## shuttler

PRC2025 said:


> Thanks! I am sure they are negotiating about the price, since that is one of the most fundamental parts of a deal of course. So I won't speculate what it is going to cost, but I am sure they will agree as they said by this year's end. China has a lot of cash, and should buy this.
> 
> Each time I see a fine Chinese pilot in a J-7, I just wanna throw up. The same goes for J-8. This is not kind of fighters China should be flying in 2013 or 2014 or onwards.
> 
> Seeing also Ming-class SSK in service does basically makes me physically ill.
> 
> So we should not complain at all having Su-35 or Amur-class SSK coming our way. After all, PLAAF and PLAN deserve the best, and I don't think we need to discuss what is better between J7/J8 on one side and Su-35 on the other side.
> 
> It would be like complaining if Russia was to sell us T-90 MBT. Sure we have T-99 and T-96 upgrades which are among top 12 in the world, but still most of MBTs are T-59. So once again, no need to discuss what is better between T-59 and T-90, lol.



All the older versions of jet fighters or subs are not competent for modern war fare if conflict with the level of the Japanese or @ SCS escalate into wars! But upgraded J-7 or J-8 or subs are still good for exports which provide affordable fit for the requirement of our customers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

cnleio said:


> LOL, still better than J-11B and J-10A. Su-35 is a good fighter.



Are you sure it is better than J-11B?

The J-11B has AESA radar compared to the PESA radar of Su-35.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PRC2025

shuttler said:


> But upgraded J-7 or J-8 or subs are still good for exports which provide affordable fit for the requirement of our customers.



Of course, upgraded J-7 and J-8 for some of our allies are good, because they "fit their security profile", or "strategy" if you will. But they don't need to worry about if they will meet Japanese or U.S. Navy, and China's ambition is to be the best. When you soon have the world's biggest economy, you soon normally would like to have world's biggest defence budget too in PPP terms, thus China's ambition is to be the best, because that's the potential of China, and no one else has this potential right now, which is to become the biggest economy and the biggest defence spender, beside China and the U.S. 

U.S. is also selling downgraded M60 tanks and downgraded M1-Abrams, and also downgraded F-16s, etc. U.S. is also selling old Oliver-class frigates as we speak, so they match requirements of those customers, but those customers know that they cannot be a "global player" anyway, and in order to be truly a global player, two things need to be there, potential for being worlds largest economy, which automatically will bring in the potential for being worlds largest defence spender.

It is not a coincidence that U.S. and China are the largest economies, and both are top 2 defence spenders as well. This goes hand-in-hand.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shuttler

PRC2025 said:


> Of course, *upgraded J-7 and J-8 for some of our allies are good, because they "fit their security profile", or "strategy" if you will. But they don't need to worry about if they will meet Japanese or U.S. Navy,* and China's ambition is to be the best. When you soon have the world's biggest economy, you soon normally would like to have world's biggest defence budget too in PPP terms, thus China's ambition is to be the best, because that's the potential of China, and no one else has this potential right now, which is to become the biggest economy and the biggest defence spender, beside China and the U.S.
> 
> U.S. is also selling downgraded M60 tanks and downgraded M1-Abrams, and also downgraded F-16s, etc. U.S. is also selling old Oliver-class frigates as we speak, so they match requirements of those customers, but those customers know that they cannot be a "global player" anyway, and in order to be truly a global player, two things need to be there, potential for being worlds largest economy, which automatically will bring in the potential for being worlds largest defence spender.
> 
> It is not a coincidence that U.S. and China are the largest economies, and both are top 2 defence spenders as well. This goes hand-in-hand.



we have to be the best because our enemies are having the best

thank you for agreeing to my statement on j-7, j-8, ming subs etc they still have export potentials. dont trash them!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cnleio

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Are you sure it is better than J-11B?
> The J-11B has AESA radar compared to the PESA radar of Su-35.


No pic and talks J8 ... Show me J-11B's AESA radar ?


----------



## PRC2025

shuttler said:


> we have to be the best because our enemies are having the best
> 
> thank you for agreeing to my statement on j-7, j-8, ming subs etc they still have export potentials. dont trash them!



For export yes, we agree, I trashed them being good enough against U.S battle fleets. So for that, PLAAF/PLAN need the best they can get.

As I mentioned, U.S is selling a lot of older or downgraded stuff, because that's what their customers or allies need, but those customers are not planning meeting China or the U.S. on the battlefield either, so those things are good enough for their requirements if you know what I mean.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

PRC2025 said:


> Each time I see a fine Chinese pilot in a J-7, I just wanna throw up. The same goes for J-8. This is not kind of fighters China should be flying in 2013 or 2014 or onwards.



J-7 is more or less relieve duty of fighter role. It basically only serves as advance fighter trainer for fighter pilot conversion course.

As for J-8II, its not as bad as you mention. It has a decent payload and is a huge plane able to carry plenty of fuel. With refuelling pod, it can extend its range significantly. It is first Multi role fighter jet in PLAAF , able to fire PL-12 BVRAAM, YJ-91 ASM and drop LS-6 glided bomb. It has a decent size radome to house a big, powerful radar. I believe, J-8 will still serve in front-line in another 10 years time.



PRC2025 said:


> Seeing also Ming-class SSK in service does basically makes me physically ill.


 Most of the old ming build in the 70s are relegate to training vessel only, they are some upgraded Ming build in the 90s which will still prove a threat to those South _east asia countries who hardly own any submarines.




PRC2025 said:


> It would be like complaining if Russia was to sell us T-90 MBT. Sure we have T-99 and T-96 upgrades which are among top 12 in the world, but still most of MBTs are T-59. So once again, no need to discuss what is better between T-59 and T-90, lol.



Most of the Type-59 tank are serving in the southern region of China which faces only South east asia countries. The land are soft and not suitable for a 50 tons MBT to operate around.

You can be very sure, the Type-99 MBT are facing the northern side against.


----------



## PRC2025

Beast said:


> J-7 is more or less relieve duty of fighter role. It basically only serves as advance fighter trainer for fighter pilot conversion course.
> As for J-8II, its not as bad as you mention. It has a decent payload and is a huge plane able to carry plenty of fuel. With refuelling pod, it can extend its range significantly. It is first Multi role fighter jet in PLAAF , able to fire PL-12 BVRAAM, YJ-91 ASM and drop LS-6 glided bomb. It has a decent size radome to house a big, powerful radar. I believe, J-8 will still serve in front-line in another 10 years time.
> 
> Most of the old ming build in the 70s are relegate to training vessel only, they are some upgraded Ming build in the 90s which will still prove a threat to those South _east asia countries who hardly own any submarines.
> 
> Most of the Type-59 tank are serving in the southern region of China which faces only South east asia countries. The land are soft and not suitable for a 50 tons MBT to operate around.
> 
> You can be very sure, the Type-99 MBT are facing the northern side against.



I am sure J-8II can perform something, but between that and Su-35, I'll take Su-35 any day, and I'll rather see 24 Su-35 in service, replacing 48 J-8II in service.

Besides, China has only a small number of J-8II, thus the whole J-8 fleet is not good enough for modern warfare. When I count PLAAF fighters, I never count J-7 or J-8. I start from Su-27 and onwards, lol. So even though J-8II might be good, it is a small numbers compared to a total number of J-8 in service.

So we agree (more or less), you could keep some J-8II in service, but there is no doubt that a huge majority of J-8 shouldn't be counted on for modern warfare.
So if PLAAF is using 1 RMB on those early J-8 versions, it is in my opinion, total waste of money.

I hope you are right regarding J-7 role. Still, China should produce more advanced trainers along the level of Yak-130, which Russians have. So either way, J-7 should prepare to go to grave yard.

There are no SE countries besides The Phillippines and Vietnam that China has issues with. While "Improved Ming" might deter the crazy ones in Manila, it will not be able to deter Vietnamese Improved Kilo-class subs they are about to receive from Russia.

So basically, keeping Ming-class in service, just because of The Phillippines would be very strange. 

Taiwan is angry at the Philippines with a good reason, and Taipei did send their best ship they got, La Fayette light frigate against the Philippines. 

So Ming-class should not stay in service just because of the Philippines.

And finally, while T-59 is facing "South East" countries; I think you once again refer to Vietnam because there are no other unfriendly nations there (Myanmar and Laos and Cambodia and Thailand are good friends with China), so I don't think that huge number of T-59s in service is justifiable. China should rather produce more IFV,APC, and other light tanks or armoured vehichles with ATGMs, etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

PRC2025 said:


> I am sure J-8II can perform something, but between that and Su-35, I'll take Su-35 any day, and I'll rather see 24 Su-35 in service, replacing 48 J-8II in service.



Nobody question Su-35 between J-8II but trying to dismiss J-8II as hopeless is dangerous. I will take 64 J-8II vs 24 Su-35 anyday. J-8II that carry domestic PL-12 BVRAAM is potent. Su35 can only fires R-77. If R-77 is such wonder missile. Why PLAAF develops a BVRAAM totally different from R-77(Aerodynamic) which they are familiar with when received from Russia together with Su-30MKK?? Plus Su-35 is not able to datalink with domestic AWACS while J-8II can.



PRC2025 said:


> Besides, China has only a small number of J-8II, thus the whole J-8 fleet is not good enough for modern warfare. When I count PLAAF fighters, I never count J-7 or J-8. I start from Su-27 and onwards, lol. So even though J-8II might be good, it is a small numbers compared to a total number of J-8 in service.







PRC2025 said:


> So we agree (more or less), you could keep some J-8II in service, but there is no doubt that a huge majority of J-8 shouldn't be counted on for modern warfare.
> So if PLAAF is using 1 RMB on those early J-8 versions, it is in my opinion, total waste of money.



They are estimate more than 240 J-8II in service. Not small number. All J-8I retired but J-8II are still highly value by PLAAF. Check out the how many type of ammunition J-8II can fired. It can be deadly.



PRC2025 said:


> I hope you are right regarding J-7 role. Still, China should produce more advanced trainers along the level of Yak-130, which Russians have. So either way, J-7 should prepare to go to grave yard.



L-15 is already on mass production and will enter service this year end. 



PRC2025 said:


> There are no SE countries besides The Phillippines and Vietnam that China has issues with. While "Improved Ming" might deter the crazy ones in Manila, it will not be able to deter Vietnamese Improved Kilo-class subs they are about to receive from Russia.
> 
> So basically, keeping Ming-class in service, just because of The Phillippines would be very strange.
> 
> Taiwan is angry at the Philippines with a good reason, and Taipei did send their best ship they got, La Fayette light frigate against the Philippines.
> 
> So Ming-class should not stay in service just because of the Philippines.
> 
> And finally, while T-59 is facing "South East" countries; I think you once again refer to Vietnam because there are no other unfriendly nations there (Myanmar and Laos and Cambodia and Thailand are good friends with China), so I don't think that huge number of T-59s in service is justifiable. China should rather produce more IFV,APC, and other light tanks or armoured vehichles with ATGMs, etc.



PLA is currently doing very well in managin its financial and resources. They will not repeat the same mistake of US armed forces of giving the best and overspend the country money. You sure do not want China to end up with mountains of debt like USA, right?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## shuttler

PRC2025 said:


> For export yes, we agree, I trashed them being good enough against U.S battle fleets. So for that, PLAAF/PLAN need the best they can get.
> 
> As I mentioned, U.S is selling a lot of older or downgraded stuff, because that's what their customers or allies need, but those customers are not planning meeting China or the U.S. on the battlefield either, so those things are good enough for their requirements if you know what I mean.



okay! many countries are still interested in buying upgraded versions of our weapons which have proved their worth!


----------



## PRC2025

Beast said:


> Nobody question Su-35 between J-8II but trying to dismiss J-8II as hopeless is dangerous. I will take 64 J-8II vs 24 Su-35 anyday. J-8II that carry domestic PL-12 BVRAAM is potent. Su35 can only fires R-77. If R-77 is such wonder missile. Why PLAAF develops a BVRAAM totally different from R-77(Aerodynamic) which they are familiar with when received from Russia together with Su-30MKK?? Plus Su-35 is not able to datalink with domestic AWACS while J-8II can.
> 
> They are estimate more than 240 J-8II in service. Not small number. All J-8I retired but J-8II are still highly value by PLAAF. Check out the how many type of ammunition J-8II can fired. It can be deadly.
> 
> PLA is currently doing very well in managin its financial and resources. They will not repeat the same mistake of US armed forces of giving the best and overspend the country money. You sure do not want China to end up with mountains of debt like USA, right?



R-77M1 is planned for Su-35, which might have up to 160 KM range. PL-12 is very potent, no doubt, but I am more excited about PL-21 which is still in development. I am no expert on AWACS, but are you saying that Russian-imported Su-27, Su-30s in PLAAF cannot send datalink to Chinese AWACS?

First J-8II series came out around 1984, so they are OLD, big time. It depends on which J-8II variant are we talking about. So how many J-8II variants does PLAAF have that were built during 1990s and up to today?

This is what I found on IISS from 2010:

24 J-8, 60 J-8A, 108 J-8B, 36 J-8D, 12 J-8E, 24 J-8F, 48 J-8H, 24 JZ-8, 24 JZ-8F in service in 2010.

So a huge number of them is J-8A and J-8B which is rather getting old. Total of 168. Having another 24 J-8 are even older. That's 192 in total.

The U.S. mistake was not the spending. The U.S. mistake is doing expencive warfare. They have spent 4 trillion USD on destroying countries since October 2001. That's 4 trillion USD that has nothing to do with defence budget, it's pure waste for warfare and maintenance because of the warfare, damages, pensions, disabilities for wounded soldiers, etc.

So I never said we should replace 192 J-8 with 192 Su-35. Point is, 192 J-8 and over 300 J-7 need to go away ASAP, and lets introduce 24 Su-35. 

The same goes for Ming-class in regards to 4 Amur-class. Take away those 19? Mings, and spend money on 4 Amur-class. Same with thousands of old T-59. Take them out and spend what you have of that amount to build for example 1.500 - 2.000 modern IFV, APC, ArmVeh with ATGMs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## That Guy

shuttler said:


> Of course he has everything in his mind to say it but it sounds ridiculous, and so are you
> 
> You are saying as if a guy's walking into a bank and you tell the banker to inform the police for robbery



Actually, that's not what I'm saying at all. In fact, that example makes no sense at all. The bank is not a place for discussion, unless they're hosting some sort of discussion panel, but this is.



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The twin 117S engines will be too large to fit into our J-31, which is now waiting for the twin medium thrust WS-13A engines.
> 
> Furthermore, the 117S engine derived from the AL-31F engine, it has not bloodline connection with our WS-10 engine, it is useless for us to reverse engineering these engines over again.
> 
> Our WS-10 engine is on the way of maturization, and the WS-15 engine is up to test, i don't think we need to copy any Russian engine, we do need the Russian engine serves as a back up when some of our engines are ready for mass production.



Re-read my comments, nowhere did I say that China was going to copy the engine, in fact, I said the exact opposite.

China isn't looking to copy the Russia, rather, they want to learn from them. Quite frankly, why should that be considered a bad thing? Nor do I feel that it is. The engine will help give them a reference to building advanced engines in the future, it's quite smart.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

That Guy said:


> Actually, that's not what I'm saying at all. In fact, that example makes no sense at all. The bank is not a place for discussion, unless they're hosting some sort of discussion panel, but this is.
> 
> 
> 
> Re-read my comments, nowhere did I say that China was going to copy the engine, in fact, I said the exact opposite.
> 
> China isn't looking to copy the Russia, rather, they want to learn from them. Quite frankly, why should that be considered a bad thing? Nor do I feel that it is. The engine will help give them a reference to building advanced engines in the future, it's quite smart.



Learn some strong points from Russia, that's it, everybody will do that.

But some people make it sounds that all Chinese aircrafts will be grounded if Russia stops the engine supply, this argument is simply ridiculous.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## That Guy

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Learn some strong points from Russia, that's it, everybody will do that.
> 
> But some people make it sounds that all Chinese aircrafts will be grounded if Russia stops the engine supply, this argument is simply ridiculous.



Of course it's ridicules, but I'm not making such an argument, now am I? The Chinese just don't want to spend dozens of more years researching the necessary steps to create high quality and high performance engines, and taking a look at the engines will help China to decrease the time it needs to do just that. They're not looking to copy, but to implement what they learn from the Russian engines into their own domestic ones.


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

China's interest is in engine and irbis PESA radar.
For now china has no credible engine to power j-20.Without TVC,supercruise or good thrust it won't be true fifth gen fighter.And russia is reluctant to give them anything beyond al-31f.
They can't copy it directly as for engines thats proven near impossible.Radar will be of interest but i'm guessing russian will supply downgraded avionics without source codes.
Still if this report is true its bad news for india as Su-35BM gives PLAAF qualitative superiority over IAF,until super-sukhoi or rfale can be inducted.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

AUSTERLITZ said:


> China's interest is in engine and irbis PESA radar.
> For now china has no credible engine to power j-20.Without TVC,supercruise or good thrust it won't be true fifth gen fighter.And russia is reluctant to give them anything beyond al-31f.
> They can't copy it directly as for engines thats proven near impossible.Radar will be of interest but i'm guessing russian will supply downgraded avionics without source codes.
> Still if this report is true its bad news for india as Su-35BM gives PLAAF qualitative superiority over IAF,until super-sukhoi or rfale can be inducted.



Nah, if we ever purchase the Su-35 aircrafts, then the only reason will be to help Russia to boast their military export, since Russia is desperate to sell their Su-35 with any pre-condition. 

Rosoboronexport offers Su-35 fighters and technology transfer to Brazil outside the framework of a tender - News - Russian Aviation - RUAVIATION.COM

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cnleio

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Are you sure it is better than J-11B?
> 
> The J-11B has AESA radar compared to the PESA radar of Su-35.



Hmmmm... don't let me wait too long. U need to provide something to prove it, for example like this J-11B. Is that AESA radar ? blurred image

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

No, that's a Russian Zhuk radar.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

cnleio said:


> Hmmmm... don't let me wait too long. U need to provide something to prove it, for example like this J-11B. Is that AESA radar ? blurred image

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cnleio

ChineseTiger1986 said:


>


LOL, that's just a introduction we still didn't see the real AESA radar, right ?


----------



## Dron.ru

SU-35C on Le Bourget 2013






*Opinion of Chinese experts:

On chinese
On russian
*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rcrmj

AUSTERLITZ said:


> China's interest is in engine and irbis PESA radar.
> For now china has no credible engine to power j-20.Without TVC,supercruise or good thrust it won't be true fifth gen fighter.And russia is reluctant to give them anything beyond al-31f.
> They can't copy it directly as for engines thats proven near impossible.Radar will be of interest but i'm guessing russian will supply downgraded avionics without source codes.
> Still if this report is true its bad news for india as Su-35BM gives PLAAF qualitative superiority over IAF,until super-sukhoi or rfale can be inducted.



radar is utter nonsense, at this point Russian does not have any capable serving air-born and sea-born AESA radars, but tpye052C/D and AWACs-2000/200 in PLAF nd PLAN are equipping not only the first but second and third generation AESA radars in numbers```people who working closely with Russians from SAC and CAC confidently said that china now is actually years ahead of Russia in terms of electronic, computing and radars``

engine is the only thing that we are far behind the U.S, but those people don't give much praise to Russian engines though``thats why Chinese engine's development are going with western standards, and almost has nothing to do with russians``

its very obvious to find this out,
engines for JH-7A/B are of British origine
and WS-10 and WS-15 are very close to Americans



AUSTERLITZ said:


> China's interest is in engine and irbis PESA radar.
> For now china has no credible engine to power j-20.Without TVC,supercruise or good thrust it won't be true fifth gen fighter.And russia is reluctant to give them anything beyond al-31f.
> They can't copy it directly as for engines thats proven near impossible.Radar will be of interest but i'm guessing russian will supply downgraded avionics without source codes.
> Still if this report is true its bad news for india as Su-35BM gives PLAAF qualitative superiority over IAF,until super-sukhoi or rfale can be inducted.



radar is utter nonsense, at this point Russian does not have any capable serving air-born and sea-born AESA radars, but tpye052C/D and AWACs-2000/200 in PLAF nd PLAN are equipping not only the first but second and third generation AESA radars in numbers```people who working closely with Russians from SAC and CAC confidently said that china now is actually years ahead of Russia in terms of electronic, computing and radars``

engine is the only thing that we are far behind the U.S, but those people don't give much praise to Russian engines though``thats why Chinese engine's development are going with western standards, and almost has nothing to do with russians``

its very obvious to find this out,
engines for JH-7A/B are of British origine
and WS-10 and WS-15 are very close to Americans



AUSTERLITZ said:


> China's interest is in engine and irbis PESA radar.
> For now china has no credible engine to power j-20.Without TVC,supercruise or good thrust it won't be true fifth gen fighter.And russia is reluctant to give them anything beyond al-31f.
> They can't copy it directly as for engines thats proven near impossible.Radar will be of interest but i'm guessing russian will supply downgraded avionics without source codes.
> Still if this report is true its bad news for india as Su-35BM gives PLAAF qualitative superiority over IAF,until super-sukhoi or rfale can be inducted.



radar is utter nonsense, at this point Russian does not have any capable serving air-born and sea-born AESA radars, but tpye052C/D and AWACs-2000/200 in PLAF nd PLAN are equipping not only the first but second and third generation AESA radars in numbers```people who working closely with Russians from SAC and CAC confidently said that china now is actually years ahead of Russia in terms of electronic, computing and radars``

engine is the only thing that we are far behind the U.S, but those people don't give much praise to Russian engines though``thats why Chinese engine's development are going with western standards, and almost has nothing to do with russians``

its very obvious to find this out,
engines for JH-7A/B are of British origine
and WS-10 and WS-15 are very close to Americans

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## zzzz

rcrmj said:


> radar is utter nonsense, at this point Russian does not have any capable serving air-born and sea-born AESA radars, but tpye052C/D and AWACs-2000/200 in PLAF nd PLAN are equipping not only the first but second and third generation AESA radars in numbers```people who working closely with Russians from SAC and CAC confidently said that china now is actually years ahead of Russia in terms of electronic, computing and radars``



 Pak-FA is flying with 1500 t/r modules AESA. Wheres is Chinese equivalent? Not even photochops?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## UKBengali

That Guy said:


> Of course it's ridicules, but I'm not making such an argument, now am I? The Chinese just don't want to spend dozens of more years researching the necessary steps to create high quality and high performance engines, and taking a look at the engines will help China to decrease the time it needs to do just that. They're not looking to copy, but to implement what they learn from the Russian engines into their own domestic ones.




You learn pretty much zero by importing engines for study.

India is far behind China and has around a decade head start as it imported them in the 1980s and China had to wait till the 1990s.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## That Guy

UKBengali said:


> You learn pretty much zero by importing engines for study.
> 
> India is far behind China and has around a decade head start as it imported them in the 1980s and China had to wait till the 1990s.



Quite the opposite, you learn quite a lot about engines by studying them, a simple example is the components needed to build such an engine, the quality that is needed and so on. Original Chinese engines were based on reverse engineered Russian engines; This gave the Chinese invaluable experience on how to build a modern engine, and most of the modern Chinese engines are a direct result of such efforts.

India has been trying to build an engine without a platform to base their own engines on, which is why India is having more trouble; add to that the fact that India is almost around a decade behind China in engine development, the Indians have a lot of catching up to do.


----------



## shuttler

That Guy said:


> Quite the opposite, you learn quite a lot about engines by studying them, a simple example is the components needed to build such an engine, the quality that is needed and so on. Original Chinese engines were based on reverse engineered Russian engines; This gave the Chinese invaluable experience on how to build a modern engine, and most of the modern Chinese engines are a direct result of such efforts.
> 
> *India has been trying to build an engine without a platform to base their own engines on*, which is why India is having more trouble; add to that the fact that India is almost around a decade behind China in engine development, the Indians have a lot of catching up to do.



that is ridiculous!

india can get direct access to birtish, french, russian figher jets and other planes which are equipped with some of the most advanced engines at their times and you claim they cannot find a suitable platform???

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## That Guy

shuttler said:


> that is ridiculous!
> 
> india can get direct access to birtish, french, russian figher jets and other planes which are equipped with some of the most advanced engines at their times and you claim they cannot find a suitable platform???



It's funny how everytime you reply to me, you tend to take everything I've said out of context.

India can get the engines, yes, but they're trying to build an engine from scratch, because they want to be able to say "Hey, this is 100% Indian!", China doesn't care about such things. China only cares about what's practical and what will lead to their complete independence in the defence field.

I'll give you a small example, don't you think that India would have been able to build an engine, if they got help from Russia and used Russian tech? Of course they would (and Russia would be delighted to help India), but this project is more to do with national pride than actual practical use. Sure they'll have a domestic engine for their future fighters like the LCA, but the engine is not expected to be as powerful as western or Russian (hell, not even Chinese) engines.


----------



## shuttler

That Guy said:


> It's funny how everytime you reply to me, you tend to take everything I've said out of context.



cos you are talking without reasons 



> India can get the engines, yes, but they're trying to build an engine from scratch, because they want to be able to say *"Hey, this is 100% Indian!"*, China doesn't care about such things. China only cares about what's practical and what will lead to their complete independence in the defence field.
> 
> I'll give you a small example, don't you think that India would have been able to build an engine, if they got help from Russia and used Russian tech? Of course they would (and Russia would be delighted to help India), but this project is more to do with national pride than actual practical use. Sure they'll have a domestic engine for their future fighters like the LCA, but the engine is not expected to be as powerful as western or Russian (hell, not even Chinese) engines.



Your comment


> *"Hey, this is 100% Indian!"*


 is so wrong

Per wikipedia:



> GTRE GTX-35VS Kaveri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> In mid-2004, the*Kaveri*failed its high-altitude tests in Russia, ending the last hopes of introducing it with the first production*Tejas*aircraft.[7]*This unfortunate development led the Indian Ministry of Defence (MoD) to order 40 more IN20 engines in 2005 for the first 20 production aircraft, and *to openly appeal for international participation in completing development of the*Kaveri. In February 2006, the ADA awarded a contract to*SNECMAfor technical assistance in working out *the*Kaveri's*problems
> 
> A press release in August 2010, stated that GTRE with the help of Central Institute of Aviation Motors (CIAM) of *Russia is trying to match objective of fine tuning of Kaveri engine performance*
> ...........
> In January 2013, the GTRE director said that they are abandoning the plan for* co-development with Snecma, but they still need an overseas partner, which will be selected through competitive bidding*



even the indians themselves do not believe you can have said this:*"Hey, this is 100% Indian!"*

you can say they are overestimating their own capabilities and underestimating the difficulties of the tasks but to say they are lack of platforms or "this is 100% indian" is not correct!

so stop the BS!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## That Guy

shuttler said:


> cos you are talking without reasons
> 
> 
> 
> Your comment is so wrong
> 
> Per wikipedia:
> 
> 
> 
> even the indians themselves do not believe you can have said this:*"Hey, this is 100% Indian!"*
> 
> you can say they are overestimating their own capabilities and underestimating the difficulties of the tasks but to say they are lack of platforms or "this is 100% indian" is not correct!
> 
> so stop the BS!



Can you please stop paraphrasing, you keep doing this. Answer my entire comment as a whole, not as uncontextualized parts.

Also, nowhere does it say that the engine is co-developed, nor that it is based on another platform.


As per your wiki article

"In January 2013, the GTRE director said that *they are abandoning the plan for co-development with Snecma*, but they still need an overseas partner, which will be selected through competitive bidding."

So they're still looking for a partner, and until they find one, it is considered a pure Indian engine. The Russians are only fine tuning the damn thing, it is still a pure Indian design.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Genesis

That Guy said:


> Can you please stop paraphrasing, you keep doing this. Answer my entire comment as a whole, not as uncontextualized parts.



You are making this sound like India CHOOSE not to be the independent. The fact that they are the world's largest importer of weapons should say something about whether they want care about pride.

If they really wanted pride, then they should use their own latest weapons, which at this point should make them as powerful as vietnam. 

So your statement makes no sense. As to practical and pride, why do you think all powerful nations have indigenous industries? Because you can go further than currently available. So it is both.

Your assumption that China completely copies because it is practical and India doesn't copy due to pride makes no sense. 

Building an engine is difficult, it is not the design, as the design was there long ago, it is the manufacturing of parts, and quality control. China at this point don't have the experience in that kind of manufacturing which DOESN'T lead to no engines, it leads to limited number of engines.

Hence it be difficult for China to match US in terms of quantity. 

So reverse engineering is not the problem here, as at this point it is pretty much useless. We have two options either keep trial or error or get expertise from nations that have decades of experience in this.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## That Guy

Genesis said:


> You are making this sound like India CHOOSE not to be the independent. The fact that they are the world's largest importer of weapons should say something about whether they want care about pride.
> 
> If they really wanted pride, then they should use their own latest weapons, which at this point should make them as powerful as vietnam.
> 
> So your statement makes no sense. As to practical and pride, why do you think all powerful nations have indigenous industries? Because you can go further than currently available. So it is both.
> 
> Your assumption that China completely copies because it is practical and India doesn't copy due to pride makes no sense.
> 
> Building an engine is difficult, it is not the design, as the design was there long ago, it is the manufacturing of parts, and quality control. China at this point don't have the experience in that kind of manufacturing which DOESN'T lead to no engines, it leads to limited number of engines.
> 
> Hence it be difficult for China to match US in terms of quantity.
> 
> So reverse engineering is not the problem here, as at this point it is pretty much useless. We have two options either keep trial or error or get expertise from nations that have decades of experience in this.



Actually, I've said the exact opposite of what you're accusing me off. I never said China copies, I never said that India is choosing whether or not to be independent (though, that is their end goal), I never said that building an engine is easy, I never said that China was trying to match the US.

I've been falsely accused of a lot of things in previous comments, but this one takes the cake.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shuttler

That Guy said:


> Can you please stop paraphrasing, you keep doing this. Answer my entire comment as a whole, not as uncontextualized parts.
> 
> Also, nowhere does it say that the engine is co-developed, nor that it is based on another platform.
> 
> 
> As per your wiki article
> 
> "In January 2013, the GTRE director said that *they are abandoning the plan for co-development with Snecma*, but they still need an overseas partner, which will be selected through competitive bidding."
> 
> So they're still looking for a partner, and until they find one, it is considered a pure Indian engine. The Russians are only fine tuning the damn thing, it is still a pure Indian design.



dont twist the facts again
France has formed a JV with the indians and* no one who is well aware of the project will say it is an 100% indigenous indian made even if it is successful (and it is not). dont fool yourself!
*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## That Guy

shuttler said:


> dont twist the facts again
> France has formed a JV with the indians and* no one who is well aware of the project will say it is an 100% indigenous indian made even if it is successful (and it is not). dont fool yourself!
> *



I'm not twisting facts, the truth is that the reason why you only highlighted a part of the sentence where it says co-development with Snecma shows that it is you that is twisting facts.

The Joint Venture was ABANDONED, IT SAYS SO IN YOUR OWN WIKIPEDIA QUOTE, WHICH YOU PURPOSEFULLY DIDN'T HIGHLIGHT.

And don't call me a fool.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Genesis

That Guy said:


> Actually, I've said the exact opposite of what you're accusing me off. I never said China copies, I never said that India is choosing whether or not to be independent (though, that is their end goal), I never said that building an engine is easy, I never said that China was trying to match the US.
> 
> I've been falsely accused of a lot of things in previous comments, but this one takes the cake.



Ok, I'm not sure I still have command of the English language, you got to be saying something. You can't be saying nothing while saying something.

Though I will say I never actually read your post it is only through another's quote. So maybe it's sarcasm, don't know, but if it is, it is really difficult online when you can't hear the tone.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shuttler

That Guy said:


> I'm not twisting facts, the truth is that the reason why you only highlighted a part of the sentence where it says co-development with Snecma shows that it is you that is twisting facts.
> 
> The Joint Venture was ABANDONED, IT SAYS SO IN YOUR OWN WIKIPEDIA QUOTE, WHICH YOU PURPOSEFULLY DIDN'T HIGHLIGHT.
> 
> And don't call me a fool.



where did I call you a fool? I said dont fool yourself!
OMG you are such a difficult person to talk to! You also fail to understand simple sentences!
If I didnt highlight it, is that you cant read the rest of the content
Chill out kid!

Where is the indigenuity of the engine if it is made by co-operating with a foreign partner using the foreigner's tech? 

indian fails to produce any jet engine to their criteria! the failed engine is indigenous indian made

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## That Guy

shuttler said:


> where did I call you a fool? I said dont fool yourself!
> OMG you are such a difficult person to talk to! You also fail to understand simple sentences!
> If I didnt highlight it, is that you cant read the rest of the content
> Chill out kid!
> 
> Where is the indigenuity of the engine if it is made by co-operating with a foreign partner using the foreigner's tech?
> 
> indian fails to produce any jet engine to their criteria! the failed engine is indigenous indian made



Calling me a fool and saying I shouldn't fool myself are the same thing, only worded differently.

highlighting things won't change facts and the fact is that you're wrong.

Now you're calling me a kid, great, now you have a superiority complex. Really, with the way you keep insulting me, no wonder you find it hard to communicate, as all you can do in the face of logic and reason is insult.


----------



## shuttler

That Guy said:


> Calling me a fool and saying I shouldn't fool myself are the same thing, only worded differently.
> 
> highlighting things won't change facts and the fact is that you're wrong.
> 
> Now you're calling me a kid, great, now you have a superiority complex. Really, with the way you keep insulting me, no wonder you find it hard to communicate, as all you can do in the face of logic and reason is insult.



let's stop here. I find it hard to communicate with you with reasons!


----------



## That Guy

shuttler said:


> let's stop here. I find it hard to communicate with you with reasons!



Funny, I could say the same about you.


----------



## Genesis

anyways this is a good deal, be better if this deal was more planes. At this point China needs to bulk up really fast in numbers. SU-35 even with the F-22 is really a good plane. 

The modernization plan for PLA is for up to 2030. Anytime before it, we pretty much a second rate military. (right now I only consider US first, rest including Russia is second.)

The SU-35 deal may do very little in the long term, but in the short term it would serve nicely in any confrontation (not war) with Japan.

The only thing I am worried about is with the Russian's own modernization plan, how much time and resources do they have to produce for China. Maybe that's why it's not a deal for more planes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## faithfulguy

That Guy said:


> Can you please stop paraphrasing, you keep doing this. Answer my entire comment as a whole, not as uncontextualized parts.
> 
> Also, nowhere does it say that the engine is co-developed, nor that it is based on another platform.
> 
> 
> As per your wiki article
> 
> "In January 2013, the GTRE director said that *they are abandoning the plan for co-development with Snecma*, but they still need an overseas partner, which will be selected through competitive bidding."
> 
> So they're still looking for a partner, and until they find one, it is considered a pure Indian engine. The Russians are only fine tuning the damn thing, it is still a pure Indian design.



Until India find a partner to help it build an engine, India will not build an engine, period.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## shree835

Nishan_101 said:


> I think China may buy just because they might *need some better fighters now* to counter the growing threat from NATO and INDIA in combine...



This disgustingwhat you mean by saying better fighters In this way you are criticizing CHINA FIGHTER jet Do not forget you are using CHINA FIGHTER jet... Give some respect.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rcrmj

zzzz said:


> Pak-FA is flying with 1500 t/r modules AESA. Wheres is Chinese equivalent? Not even photochops?



is it operational? my previous post said *'any serving air born AESA'* kid, Russian air force has none

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## zzzz

rcrmj said:


> is it operational? my previous post said *'any serving air born AESA'* kid, Russian air force has none



Chinese airforce dont have anything comparable, neither in service, nor in flying test. Tell me more fairly tales from your delusional world how China is "years ahead" in radars and bla-bla-bla, your incompetent and clueless bragging shouts always so enjoyable in military threads, you are unending source of fun, boy


----------



## rcrmj

zzzz said:


> Chinese airforce dont have anything comparable, neither in service, nor in flying test. Tell me more fairly tales from your delusional world how China is "years ahead" in radars and bla-bla-bla, your incompetent and clueless bragging shouts always so enjoyable in military threads, you are unending source of fun, boy



difficult for you to accept the reality,
KJ-2000, Kj-200 and th AWACs sold to PAF are all with mutual air born AESAs, J-15, J-11B and J-16 are all with AESA,

and those people working on CAC and SAC are very experienced with Russian stuffs, unfortunately Russian electronics and quite backward compared to western and now lagged behind than China

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## PRC2025

zzzz said:


> Chinese airforce dont have anything comparable, neither in service, nor in flying test. Tell me more fairly tales from your delusional world how China is "years ahead" in radars and bla-bla-bla, your incompetent and clueless bragging shouts always so enjoyable in military threads, you are unending source of fun, boy



I am usually for good partnership and friendship with Russia, but your attacks aren't helping. I mean, if he doesn't know what he is talking about; then why so serioooouuussss? As Joker used to say 

I mean, if you are so sure of the "superiority" of the Russian Air Force (RuAF), then just take it easy.

Both Russia and China are cooperating, so please don't blame it on the Chinese that you got incompetent traitor as Gorbatsjev and thefore fell for the trap called the "democracy", thus collapsing totally because of that.

Russian Air Force has some serious problems, and it is only for the past two years things have started to improve gradually from a level that can be described as "horrible".

*Not long ago, the Russian Air Force was in really bad shape. Almost all of its planes were 20-25 years old, outdated, and in poor condition.*

Russian Air Force | Russian Military Reform

As you can see from the link and this blog which is being written by serious people who keep tracking developments within Russian Armed Forces, the Russian Air Force has turned the table only for the past two years where the RuAF received 10 Su-34, 6 Su-35, 2 Su-30BMs for 2012, which means 18 fighters for 2012 in addition to over 20 Yak-130 advanced trainers. There were also some helicopters in the picture such as Mi-28 and Ka-52.

He also states clearly that Russia will FAIL in achieving their goal of receiving 600 new fixed-wing aircraft by 2020. Russia will also fail according to him, to deliver the target of 1,120 helicopters by 2020, thus he predicts that this might be achieved by 2025.

I mean you don't need to be rocket scientist to understand that receiving 20 fighters or so a year, won't get you to 600 by the year of 2020.

So we can sit here and argue which air force is better, the PLAAF or the RuAF. Simply, I know which one is better, and again, which one will be even better by 2020 so I have no use of pointing out which one that would be.

Furthermore Russia and China are strategic partners, and you should promote good relations between then. After all, it is not China that demonized you since the 1945, neither it is China that gave you losers like Gorbatsjev and Jeltsin where both are directly responcible for the state of the Russian Armed Forces since 1991.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rcrmj

and not to mention their notorious reputation of horrendous after sell services, low quality spare parts and ever delaying delivery``I guess IA will have the exactly the same feelings of what PLAAF has

the Su-35 deal is likely to go through, but its merely for geopolitical and economical purpose, and the real defence motion behind that was the deal of co-development Lada class subs``(you know Russians are good at selling stuff in package)

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## shuttler

Guys dont trust the flags and beware of false flaggers

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## zzzz

zzzz said:


> Chinese airforce dont have anything comparable, neither in service, nor in flying test. Tell me more fairly tales from your delusional world how China is "years ahead" in radars and bla-bla-bla, your incompetent and clueless bragging shouts always so enjoyable in military threads, you are unending source of fun, boy



And still nothing comparable to PAK-FA AESA, so much for someone "years ahead" in radars and electronics  case closed

P.S. Hint: When some country with very low expirience in radar tech uses recent western advances in electronics that allows to build radar following new AESA concept, that still doesnt mean that this radar is not inferior in hundreds of different parameters to latest radars developed by countries, that are actually "years ahead" in radar tech


----------



## zzzz

PRC2025 said:


> I am usually for good partnership and friendship with Russia, but your attacks aren't helping. I mean, if he doesn't know what he is talking about; then why so serioooouuussss? As Joker used to say
> 
> I mean, if you are so sure of the "superiority" of the Russian Air Force (RuAF), then just take it easy.



Where did i say anything about superiority of RuAF? You should talk not to me, but to the guy, who is known to regularly spout BS about Russian equipment and at the same time bragging about superior Chinese capabilities in almost everything.


----------



## rcrmj

zzzz said:


> *And still nothing comparable to PAK-FA AESA*, so much for someone "years ahead" in radars and electronics  case closed
> 
> P.S. Hint: When some country with very low expirience in radar tech uses recent western advances in electronics that allows to build radar following new AESA concept, that still doesnt mean that this radar is not inferior in hundreds of different parameters to latest radars developed by countries, that are actually "years ahead" in radar tech



sounds more like a Kremlin groundless boasting, Russia even has to buy T/R modular from western companies..

anything the PLA bought from Russia, even in 90s the first thing we did to replace was the radar and electronics


----------



## rcrmj

zzzz said:


> Where did i say anything about superiority of RuAF? You should talk not to me, but to the guy, who is known to regularly spout BS about Russian equipment and at the same time bragging about superior Chinese capabilities in almost everything.



that's not my opinion, those are the consensus from Chinese engineers and scientists from SAC and CAC
consensus 1: Russian radar and avionics far behind U.S standards
consensus 2: China nowadays is ahead of Russia in terms of aerodynamic designs, AESA radar and air-born electronics, and the gap is increasing
consensus 3: China is at least 20 years behind U.S in terms of turbo-fan engine techs
consensus 4: China is behind Russia in terms of turbo-fan structural design but not in manufacturing and material area
consensus 5: apart from ballistic missiles and nuclear arsenals, subs are the only sector that China really wants to learn from Russia


----------



## zzzz

rcrmj said:


> that's not my opinion, those are the consensus from Chinese engineers and scientists from SAC and CAC
> consensus 1: Russian radar and avionics far behind U.S standards
> consensus 2: China nowadays is ahead of Russia in terms of aerodynamic designs, AESA radar and air-born electronics, and the gap is increasing
> consensus 3: China is at least 20 years behind U.S in terms of turbo-fan engine techs
> consensus 4: China is behind Russia in terms of turbo-fan structural design but not in manufacturing and material area
> consensus 5: apart from ballistic missiles and nuclear arsenals, subs are the only sector that China really wants to learn from Russia



That are just a bunch of laughable statements with zero proofs and evidence. As i recall 2-3 years ago all Chinese experts were claiming how they reached Russian level in engine development 
The aerodynamic designs part was best btw  that should be some hard stuff you got


----------



## Beast

zzzz said:


> That are just a bunch of laughable statements with zero proofs and evidence. As i recall 2-3 years ago all Chinese experts were claiming how they reached Russian level in engine development
> The aerodynamic designs part was best btw  that should be some hard stuff you got



That are just bunch of laughable statement and news with zero proof and evidence of Su-35 contract with China... It's been talking since 2007 and until now. We have not even see a sh+t of it being signed. Cheer by the Russian fanboy who cannot accept the reality of their Russia aviation lead surrender to new rising China. 

Show me what sh*t has signed about Su-35 with China yet? None!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cnleio

STUPID !  (maybe PESA) Any questions ?


----------



## rcrmj

zzzz said:


> That are just a bunch of laughable statements with zero proofs and evidence. As i recall 2-3 years ago all Chinese experts were claiming how they reached Russian level in engine development
> The aerodynamic designs part was best btw  that should be some hard stuff you got



their statements are more than reliable than some Russian high claims, at least we our first J-20, J31, J-10B and KJ-2000/200 info were leaked from them years before the actual acknowledgement of the physical appearance of those respectively````

yet what you've got are usual this and that speculations

just look at the Su-27 and F-22 hybrid T-50, which btw is the best you guys can pull``

and back to my previous question, where is the 'superdoper' Russia air-born AESA radar in service?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PRC2025

zzzz said:


> Where did i say anything about superiority of RuAF? You should talk not to me, but to the guy, who is known to regularly spout BS about Russian equipment and at the same time bragging about superior Chinese capabilities in almost everything.



I am just saying that we are replying in a normal way and with facts.

We have admitted several times that Russia is still better at SSN subs. ICBMs; its starting to be even; we have DF-41, JL-2, JL-3 is in development, and you have Bulava and Topol-M. 

So that's great, I don't see any problems there. And you have also the edge with S-400 SAM system, but again, that is something China will get in 2017 according to Russian sources, and that will most likely be the last time China buys a SAM from Russia.

China stopped buying ships from Russia like loooooong time ago. I don't need to link here how old ships Russian Navy still has, and I don't need to point out how many more SSK subs China has compared to Russia. 

So the fact is; it's been very long time Sovremmeny-class destroyer was a "top tier" in PLAN. These days, it's more like "Tier 3" category, being below 054A frigate, and certanly below 052C and 052D destroyers. Russia on the other hand, still have only 3 old Slava-class destroyers alongside 1 Kirov-class, where all ships are from when the USSR existed.

Hopefully, we will cooperate in regards to building SSK Amur-class for both countries. Russia have had problems with building this alone.

Regarding electronics; China is better at that too, because China has gained both Western and Russian tech, just as you and the West gained their tech from the Germans in 1945.

Now China is at at level where they are confident enough in these things.

Finally; China might buy 24 Su-35 since that would be the lowest amount Russia would accept for making a deal. China only want's to see the engine; everything else, PLAAF is not interested in, and you know it. I remember China asking for 2 or 3 Su-35 only, but Russia denied that of course.

Either way; we need to replace J-8s, and Su-35 would be very good replacement while we are building J-10, J-11, J-15, J-16 and developing J-20 and J-31.

To sum this up; Russia still has an edge in SSN sub tech, and SAMs such as S-400 + engines. But that is about to get even, since China will get S-400 and develops engines that will be at least as good as what Russia has, especially after Su-35 deliveries. That leaves you with one thing which is still having better SSN tech.

Now, it's time for you to admit that Russian Navy is OLD, NOT combat ready, CANNOT produce stealthy ships, is NOT combat ready, and the Navy has only a few old Kilos which are not upgraded compared to at least 30 modern SSKs China has in it's arsenal.

The same goes for the Air Force. Majority of your fighters are MiG-29 and Su-27, many of them in BAD condition, beyond reparable, and not even working. I don't even need to mention combat readiness.

So I am not bashing RuAF or Russian Navy (RuNavy); I am just pointing out weakesses which your president Putin, who has a spine compared to the democratic losers of Gorbatsjov and Jeltsin, has embarked on a huge re-armament for the Russian Armed Forces.
And why is that? Not just because of the old equipment, but also because of the poor performance of the Russian Air Force against Georgia in August 2008.

A small country like Georgia was shooting down 1 aircraft per day. So you lost like 5 or 6 aircraft in a 5-6 day war against a country such as Georgia. And they basically did all that without having aircraft in the air. They did all this with old SAMs such as Buk-M which did had some Israeli-upgrades though. You even lost a bomber, Tu-23.

Other reports even pointed out that your ground forces didn't even had night vision capability and that Georgian T-72 were more upgraded than Russian T-72s.

So I am not bashing Russia or anything, I am just pointing out weaknesses in which both Russia and China are aware off. That's why they cooperate together. 

I wish Russia all the best, because Russia should have better equipment, and your president Putin understand that the equipment you have today is OLD, and need to be replaced. 

PLA has also old equipment such as Ming-class SSK, T-59s MBT, J-7 and J-8 fighters but China has also a fair amount of modern weapons and it is increasing month by month. And that is the problem with Russian Armed Forces, which is that there are too few modern units in service - both in the Navy and in the Air Force.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ptldM3

rcrmj said:


> radar is utter nonsense, at this point Russian does not have any capable serving air-born and sea-born AESA radars,




Russia's Operational or future operational AESAs are more transparent then China's when it comes to reports made public. Most Chinese supposed AESA claims come from blurry photos or rumors while most of Russia's AESA radars are confirmed on paper, on video interviews/images and in none blurry photos.

Russia operates ground based AESA's, has a number of airborne AESAs and is also developing sea based AESA that may be operational.



rcrmj said:


> but tpye052C/D and AWACs-2000/200 in PLAF nd PLAN are equipping not only the first but second and third generation AESA radars in numbers```*people who working closely with Russians from SAC and CAC confidently said that china now is actually years ahead of Russia in terms of electronic, computing and radars*``




The closest that those people(if even real) have gotten to modern Russian technology was looking at photos  unless you are gullible enough to believe that Russia just let China inspect, take apart, and test technologies in the pak-fa, Mig-35, SU-34, and a number of electronics warfare aircraft.






rcrmj said:


> that's not my opinion, those are the consensus from Chinese engineers and scientists from SAC and CAC
> 
> consensus 2: China nowadays is ahead of Russia in terms of aerodynamic designs, AESA radar and air-born electronics, and the gap is increasing



And how would you know this? Russia still holds or set many records in endurance, range, and performance (rate of climb, acceleration, ect). Have any proof that even modern Chinese aircraft can match or exceed records set by older Russian aircraft?

Why even copy the SU-27 if you claim you are years ahead in aerodynamics? The SU-27 set the standard for performance and is difficult to match even today, hence why China is constantly developing variants based on the SU-27; but even with the SU-27s high standards we know the pak-fa surpasses the SU-27 in many areas which is extremely difficult to do.


----------



## PRC2025

ptldM3 said:


> Why even copy the SU-27 if you claim you are years ahead in aerodynamics? The SU-27 set the standard for performance and is difficult to match even today, hence why China is constantly developing variants based on the SU-27; but even with the SU-27s high standards we know the pak-fa surpasses the SU-27 in many areas which is extremely difficult to do.



*The PLA is now operating or developing no less than eight distinct variants or derivatives of the Russian developed Flanker fighter.

This is greater diversity in variants of the Flanker than the diversity of the Russian Federation armed forces which operate the Su-27S Flanker B, Su-27UB Flanker C, Su-27M/Su-35 Flanker E, Su-27MUB/Su-35UB Flanker E, Su-27K/Su-33 Flanker D and in 2012, the Su-35S.

The common perception, reinforced by Russian media disinformation, is that Chinese Flankers are either Russian sourced, or exact clones of Russian variants. This is not correct,

There is ample evidence at this time to state that Chinese Flankers are a unique family of aircraft, following *

PLA-AF and PLA-N Flanker Variants

Furthermore:

Many PLAAF fighters carry beyond-visual-range air-to-air missiles and precision guided munitions.

RAND estimated that within a decade, the PLAAF&#8217;s capabilities "could begin to approach those of the US Air Force."

Beyond these points, the PLAAF has put new emphasis on recruiting and training pilots. The MND announced last fall that the PLAAF had joined with Tsinghua University, a prestigious technical institute, to set up a program intended to draw the best and the brightest into the air service. The first group of pilot cadets was required to meet the academic standards of civilian applicants and the physical standards of the PLAAF. Those accepted will spend three years as undergraduates at Tsinghua, and then transfer to the Aviation University of the Air Force for their final year of college. This effort would be analogous to the USAF joining with MIT or Cal Tech to educate young officers&#8212;and potentially, someday, Air Force generals.

In flight training, today&#8217;s PLAAF reportedly gives pilots 200 hours a year in the air, a striking increase from the fewer than 24 hours a year during the depths of the Cultural Revolution.

In this respect, the PLAAF is approaching the standard set by USAF. China&#8217;s days of fielding obsolete air forces with poor training and outdated doctrine have clearly come to an end.

A Revolution for China


Lets see a little bit more about Russian tanks, oh well, they have to scrap most of them I guess:

Outmoded tanks and armored vehicles will be scrapped in a "massive" scheme launched by the defense ministry last year, a senior military official said on Friday.

"From 2011 onward, in accordance with a government decree the Defense Ministry has begun taking outdated automobiles and armored vehicles out of service and getting rid of them," Gen Maj Alexander Shevchenko told reporters in Moscow.

The scheme involves T-80, T-64, T-55, tanks as well as a number of army trucks.

Russia Announces 'Massive' Tank Scrappage Scheme | Defense | RIA Novosti

How many T-90s are you left with compared to upgraded T-96 and T-99 in PLA? Not that we will fight, I am just asking. You need them against NATO-pact terrorists.

Finally, about those "wonderful" jets in the Russian Air Force these days:

About one-third of all Russian fighter jets should be written off as obsolete because they are unable to fly, *the Kommersant business daily reported on Friday, quoting defense ministry and military officials.* 
Russia's Defense Ministry for the first time recognized that around 200 of its MiG-29s are not just unable to cope with their combat tasks, but simply cannot take off," the paper said.

Russia's armed forces now have 291 MiG-29s, but around 200 MiGs are unsafe and have to be grounded for good, the paper said. That would take out of action about a third of all Russia's fleet of fighter jets, which totals some 650 aircraft.

Source posted by: Reuters/FlightGlobal

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

It is no doubt, the original Russian Su-27SK is crapped and only fit to combat in the 80s..

J-11B is modernise Su-27SK with major upgrade to bring flanker to the modern 21st century capable of handling multi threat and unique to the Chinese.

China's J-11 Fighter Jet Modernization Program | ASIAN DEFENCE NEWS

Extract from the article....


> ) The wide* adoption of composite material *(mainly carbon fiber) for the surfaces, *reducing the weight of the aircraft for more than 700 kg*, while the life of the *composite part is increased over 10,000 hours in comparison to the original part built from steel*.
> Original Su-27SK has no composite
> 
> 2) *Redesigned air inlets* of engine intakes to *reduce the radar cross section*, this coupled with the adoption of composite material, and application of radar absorbent material has *reduced the radar cross section (RCS) of 15 square meters of Su-27SK to just >3 square meters of J-11B*.
> 
> 3) Full air-to-surface / sea capability is added and J-11B is able to launch various precision guided air-to-surface and air-to-sea munitions. Original Su-27SK can only used for air superiority and the only air to ground attack abilities is dropping dumb bombs and fire unguided rocket.
> 
> 4) Certified to be equipped with WS-10 (will be upgraded to WS-10A in the future) turbofan engine, which is claimed to be cheaper to operate than AL-31F.
> 
> 5) *Incorporation of on-board oxygen generating system (OBOGS): With the exception of Su-35 and Su-37, J-11B is the first* of the Su-27 family to incorporate such technology. Due to the adoption of western style design features such as fully digitized computerized controls and solid state micro-electronics, Chinese claimed that the domestic OBOGS is superior than the analog system Russia offered to China. Original Su-27SK do not even has such thing to allow high attitude engagement.
> 
> 6) *Improved radar. The new radar is able to track 8 targets at the same time, and engage 4 of the 8 tracked simultaneously*. When used against large surface target such as a destroyer, the maximum range of the radar was in excess of 350 km. The range against aerial targets was not disclosed, but it would be definitely much shorter, as in all radars. The Chinese official report claims that the radar is better than the 147x/KLJ-X radar family, but stop short of identifying the exact type. Contrary to many erroneous comments by many domestic Chinese sources, which mistakenly claimed that the radar had adopted a passive phased array antenna, the official claims of many Chinese governmental sources such as technical journals and publications have revealed that the radar still adopted a slotted planar array antenna.
> 
> 
> 7) *Fully digitized solid-state avionics has replaced the analogue one in Su-27SK*. In the mid-2007, the Chinese governmental television station CCTV-7 released news clips of Chinese pilots in the cockpits of J-11B, with the LCD of glass cockpit of J-11B clearly visible, despite that the official report itself only claimed replacing the original avionics with domestic Chinese fully digitized solid-state avionics, and nothing of EFIS or glass cockpit was mentioned. In comparison to the earlier EFIS on J-11A, the most obvious difference is that LCD MFDs on J-11B are aligned in a straight line, instead of the middle one being slightly lower. The arrangement, appearance and layout of MFDs and EFIS of J-11B are similar to the general design concept of the west.
> 
> 8) Missile Approach Warning System.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dron.ru

zzzz said:


> Chinese airforce dont have anything comparable, neither in service, nor in flying test. Tell me more fairly tales from your delusional world how China is "years ahead" in radars and bla-bla-bla, your incompetent and clueless bragging shouts always so enjoyable in military threads, you are unending source of fun, boy



We should understand what we say, where we say and where it leads. If we want to continue to have friends and partners, the arrogance is better to present the Americans.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rcrmj

ptldM3 said:


> Why even copy the SU-27 if you claim you are years ahead in aerodynamics? The SU-27 set the standard for performance and is difficult to match even today, hence why China is constantly developing variants based on the SU-27; but even with the SU-27s high standards we know the pak-fa surpasses the SU-27 in many areas which is extremely difficult to do.



the introduction of Su-27 was a millstone for Chinese aviation industry, and it gave SAC (the most dominant and biggest aero unit at that time), the first time to learn crucial know-how of building a fourth gen fighter.

and this know-how is not only about the aerodynamics (which is the least aspect to learn, as CAC and SAC spent decades on it, although just on paper), but the techniques, avionics, radars and its structural design.

China keeps developing 27 series are not because how advanced it is (aerodynamically yes), it is because Su-27 series is the one of the backbones of PLAAF alone with J-10, so 100% indigenous is vital to PLAAF's fighting power, and as people from SAC said the upgrades on Su-27/30 were mainly for its material, weapon system, avionics and radar, which they believe now they are surpassing the Russians, not the structural design.

and it was also true that at the very beginning China sent people to talk with Russians about co-developing a 5th gen fighter aka Pak-fa, however, they were not impressed, as they believed both concepts of J-20 from CAC and J-31 from SAC were surpassing Pak-fa in many crucial areas, like aerodynamics, avionics, weapon system, radar and stealth.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Developereo

I would ask the Chinese members to remember that the Russians have been in this business for decades, and gave the Americans a run for their money. While most fair-minded people are impressed by China's progress, it would be unwise to underestimate Russian capabilities.

Unless you are making a sales pitch to a buyer, it's better to underplay one's own capabilities, and over-estimate others'.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## zzzz

rcrmj said:


> the introduction of Su-27 was a millstone for Chinese aviation industry, and it gave SAC (the most dominant and biggest aero unit at that time), the first time to learn crucial know-how of building a fourth gen fighter.
> 
> and this know-how is not only about the aerodynamics (which is the least aspect to learn, as CAC and SAC spent decades on it, although just on paper), but the techniques, avionics, radars and its structural design.
> 
> China keeps developing 27 series are not because how advanced it is (aerodynamically yes), it is because Su-27 series is the one of the backbones of PLAAF alone with J-10, so 100% indigenous is vital to PLAAF's fighting power, and as people from SAC said the upgrades on Su-27/30 were mainly for its material, weapon system, avionics and radar, which they believe now they are surpassing the Russians, not the structural design.
> 
> and it was also true that at the very beginning China sent people to talk with Russians about co-developing a 5th gen fighter aka Pak-fa, however, they were not impressed, as they believed both concepts of J-20 from CAC and J-31 from SAC were surpassing Pak-fa in many crucial areas, like aerodynamics, avionics, weapon system, radar and stealth.



You do understand that the tales about SAC engineers, people you sent to co-develope PAK-FA etc etc serve the only one purpose - entertainment. Sure you can tell such stories on Chinese forums to each other to create some wonderful role-playing fantasy world, but what make you think anyone outside of China interested in them? 

Almost the whole Chinese military are based on copied Russian concepts. Copied airframes, engines, radars, materials etc. Do you know what is the general opinion of Chinese capabilities among the people from Russian military-industrial complex, engineers, scientists etc? They think that while you can use old Russian concepts and even improve them, twink and upgrade, install new kinds of technology and make these weapon systems even better than original, you still lack the fundamental understanding of how these sytems work, you lack basic scientific and mathematical knowledge about aerodynamics, materials, behaviour of electromagnetic waves and so on, so all your capabilities are limited to upgrading an existed weapon systems and you are still not capable to create anything innovative. And that is not my opinion, but opinion of many knowledgeable Russian and American scientists.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rcrmj

zzzz said:


> You do understand that the tales about SAC engineers, people you sent to co-develope PAK-FA etc etc serve the only one purpose - entertainment. Sure you can tell such stories on Chinese forums to each other to create some wonderful role-playing fantasy world, but what make you think anyone outside of China interested in them?
> 
> Almost the whole Chinese military are based on copied Russian concepts. Copied airframes, engines, radars, materials etc. Do you know what is the general opinion of Chinese capabilities among the people from Russian military-industrial complex, engineers, scientists etc? They think that while you can use old Russian concepts and even improve them, twink and upgrade, install new kinds of technology and make these weapon systems even better than original, you still lack the fundamental understanding of how these sytems work, you lack basic scientific and mathematical knowledge about aerodynamics, materials, behaviour of electromagnetic waves and so on, so all your capabilities are limited to upgrading an existed weapon systems and you are still not capable to create anything innovative. And that is not my opinion, but opinion of many knowledgeable Russian and American scientists.



lol, your funny ego goes burst``easy to understand, nowadays no one believes anything that coming from Russia media in China, even they believe that traditional china bashing western media is much creditable than the Russians,
apart from Russian, no one thinks t-50 is a true capable 5th gen fighter, it is just a 'flattened' flanker, and also only Russians believe that they are good at radar and avionics, yet based on PLAAF years awful experience with those, even we are buying anything from Russia the first thing to replace are the radars and avionics.

and even IA realising it now too, as they are seeking western and Israeli avionics to replace less advanced Russians,

and the funniest part of your sheer ignorance is


> you still lack the fundamental understanding of how these sytems work, you lack basic scientific and mathematical knowledge about aerodynamics, materials, behaviour of electromagnetic waves and so on, so all your capabilities are limited to upgrading an existed weapon systems and you are still not capable to create anything innovative



so I guess J-10, J-20, J-31, 052C/D Agies DDG, KJ-2000/200 AESA AWACs, HHQ-9, HHQ-16 and DF-21A are all created without understanding your funny 'basics' then?

oh, btw, you still haven't answered my question, where is the Russian serving air-born AESA or Agies systems that to prove you guys are still 'good' at radars?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rcrmj

Developereo said:


> I would ask the Chinese members to remember that the Russians have been in this business for decades, and gave the Americans a run for their money. While most fair-minded people are impressed by China's progress, it would be unwise to underestimate Russian capabilities.
> 
> Unless you are making a sales pitch to a buyer, it's better to underplay one's own capabilities, and over-estimate others'.



the key point is they *were* in business for decades and *gave* the Americans a good run..

and they did have great respect from Chinese scientists* in the past*, but it is kind eroding away in the sense that nowadays they start to brag more and deliver less and keep giving groundless accusations to China's fast progress

and this phenomenon is well reflected on the views from major Chinese defence forums

14 years ago when I started browsing those, you'd find the views were overwhelmingly pro Russian's defence tech, but now it is the very opposite way of views on Russians tech (at least those sold to us)

numerous people who are from SAC, CAC and other units that have extensive contacts with Russian techs expressed the similar views on their products, and also the desire to have a glimpse on western kits (Pakistan helped us in great deal, you know what I mean )

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Developereo

rcrmj said:


> keep giving groundless accusations to China's fast progress



I am sure the real scientists in all the countries respect each other much more than people on the internet do.


----------



## PRC2025

rcrmj said:


> so I guess J-10, J-20, J-31, 052C/D Agies DDG, KJ-2000/200 AESA AWACs, HHQ-9, HHQ-16 and DF-21A are all created without understanding your funny 'basics' then?
> 
> oh, btw, you still haven't answered my question, where is the Russian serving air-born AESA or Agies systems that to prove you guys are still 'good' at radars?



Hehe, how about this "wonderful flagship" in the Black Sea? I guess it's a flagship of the Black Sea Fleet? lol 

File:

Or this one, from 1983, only 30 years old, lol.

File:Slava-Cruiser-DN-SC-86-03642.JPEG - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Don't forget those 200 MiG-29 that can't even fly and should be scrapped according to Russian sources. At least, our J-8 are still working and can fly at least.

Not to mention the fact, that France is building ships for Russia these days. and they have to import second or third-hand UAVs from Israel.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PRC2025

Developereo said:


> I am sure the real scientists in all the countries respect each other much more than people on the internet do.



Most of us do respect Russians and all opinion polling shows that too. Most Chinese are favorable towards Russians, the same goes the other way around.

It's just that some Russian fanboys here cannot accept that China is ahead in many areas. It was the same thing in the 1990s regarding the economy. Now Russia accepts finally that they cannot match combined Chinese economy. 

The same about the defence budget which is now twice as high as the Russian defence budget. 

Most Russians are fine with the fact that the Chinese economy and defence budget is considerably higher compared to Russia - yet som extreme fanboys cannot accept that PLA is also militarily ahead in many areas. I find that very strange.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Beast

Developereo said:


> I am sure the real scientists in all the countries respect each other much more than people on the internet do.


Tell that to those narrow minded nationalistic Russian too.



PRC2025 said:


> Hehe, how about this "wonderful flagship" in the Black Sea? I guess it's a flagship of the Black Sea Fleet? lol
> 
> File:
> 
> Or this one, from 1983, only 30 years old, lol.
> 
> File:Slava-Cruiser-DN-SC-86-03642.JPEG - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Don't forget those 200 MiG-29 that can't even fly and should be scrapped according to Russian sources. At least, our J-8 are still working and can fly at least.
> 
> Not to mention the fact, that France is building ships for Russia these days. and they have to import second or third-hand UAVs from Israel.



Precisely, those were never heard during Soviet Union times and Soviet union was already 20 years ago old story.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Developereo

Beast said:


> Tell that to those narrow minded nationalistic Russian too.



Absolutely.

Anyone who claims that Chinese achievements are the result of "copying" or "lack basic knowledge" only expose their own ignorance.

Like I wrote, I am sure real Russian/American scientists have a lot of respect for Chinese scientists, and vice versa.


----------



## StarCraft_ZT

it is great!!


----------



## ptldM3

rcrmj said:


> *and this know-how is not only about the aerodynamics (which is the least aspect to learn*, as CAC and SAC spent decades on it, although just on paper), but the techniques, avionics, radars and its structural design.



your assumption and that is what it is, is false. Ever wonder why advisers at Yakovlev advised the Chinese and Italians when they were building training aircraft? Ever wonder why China purchased the T-10 from Ukraine? If it were so easy to produce airframes none of this would be necessary.

Given the right people, resources, funding, and facilities an airframe can be built (with time) but there is no guarantee that it will be very good in terms of flight characteristics, endurance, payload, ect. Again, this is why China continues to built flankers derivatives, it's easier to upgrade a platform then built an entirely new one. Moreover, with the case of the flanker the aircraft is pushing the limits of aviation, it has the range and payload of a light bomber but the maneuverability of an aerobatics aircraft.




rcrmj said:


> *China keeps developing 27 series are not because how advanced it is (aerodynamically yes), it is because Su-27 series is the one of the backbones of PLAAF* alone with J-10, so 100% indigenous is vital to PLAAF's fighting power,




You know, anyone can cross check facts and the fact is that the SU-27 was *never* the backbone of the PLAAF, China only produced or acquired around 100 SU-27s and by now many have been retired.

So now that the truth is know about the SU-27 numbers why would the PLAAF and PLAN start to not only acquire flankers from Russia such as the SU-30 but also continue to produce flanker variants? Could it be because the flanker broke no less then 40 world records? Could it be because the range, weapons payload, maneuverability and flexibility of the flanker platform is unrivaled and quite frankly difficult to match.


Why don't we see the JH-7, which is much newer than the SU-27 being produced in numbers like we see flankers? Think about it, the JH-7 essentially does the same role as the Flanker, is much newer, and is indigenous, yet China prefers the Flanker wether it be a single seater, multirole double seater, or naval, China chooses the Older Russian designed flanker over the newer JH-7.





rcrmj said:


> and as people from SAC said the upgrades on Su-27/30 were mainly for its material, *weapon system, avionics and radar, which they believe now they are surpassing the Russians*, not the structural design.




Yet China *ordered KA-31 and KA-28 electronic warfare* helicopters from Russia not too long ago. Why would China order electronics warfare aircraft from Russia when most here claim that Russian avionics are inferior? 

Besides the people from the SAC have no access to the latest Russian avionics, so how would they know this?  Even the KA-31s and KA-28s were export versions and Russia has been know to leave out certain systems on export aircraft.





rcrmj said:


> and it was also true that at the very beginning China sent people to talk with Russians about co-developing a 5th gen fighter aka Pak-fa, however, they were not impressed, as they believed both concepts of J-20 from CAC and J-31 from SAC were surpassing Pak-fa in many crucial areas, like aerodynamics, avionics, weapon system, radar and stealth.




How would the Chinese believe they had a superior aircraft with superior radar, aerodynamics, weapons, ect if *none of it existed*. Heck even if Russia had a prototype there is no way China could varify the prototypes performance just by looking at it. Why do you think Sukhoi intends to put the pak-fa through 2000 test flights? The designers themselves are not 100% sure about an aircraft's performance until they actually physically test it, and so far the pak-fa is exceeding expectations. 

So in reality, Russia never had a pak-fa to show to China or any systems for the pak-fa, nor did they have any test data from the pak-fa, and the Chinese concluded that they had a superior aircraft?  Keep believing those fairytales from 'insiders' or people at 'SAC'.









rcrmj said:


> apart from Russian, no one thinks t-50 is a true capable 5th gen fighter, it is just a 'flattened' flanker,




This is ignorance, if the pak-fa is just a flattened flanker then the J-20 is just a black J-10 with an extra vertical stabilizer. Why not just call the F-22 an upgraded F-15? 

There is not one design feature on the pak-fa that is taken from a flanker, in terms of design the pak-fa has less in common with the flanker then the F-22 does with the F-15.




rcrmj said:


> and also only Russians believe that they are good at radar and avionics, yet based on PLAAF years awful experience with those, *even we are buying anything from Russia the first thing to replace are the radars and avionics.*



Total nonsense, China purchased KA-31's and KA-28's from Russia, the only reason they purchased these was because of the electronics warfare capabilities, why would China purchase a more expensive specialized version of a helicopter when they could just purchase a cheaper off the shelf helicopter and install their own electronics?

China purchased the KA-31's and KA-28's even though China has helicopters for anti submarine patrols/electronics warfare.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

ptldM3 said:


> your assumption and that is what it is, is false. Ever wonder why advisers at Yakovlev advised the Chinese and Italians when they were building training aircraft? Ever wonder why China purchased the T-10 from Ukraine? If it were so easy to produce airframes none of this would be necessary.
> 
> Given the right people, resources, funding, and facilities an airframe can be built (with time) but there is no guarantee that it will be very good in terms of flight characteristics, endurance, payload, ect. Again, this is why China continues to built flankers derivatives, it's easier to upgrade a platform then built an entirely new one. Moreover, with the case of the flanker the aircraft is pushing the limits of aviation, it has the range and payload of a light bomber but the maneuverability of an aerobatics aircraft.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You know, anyone can cross check facts and the fact is that the SU-27 was *never* the backbone of the PLAAF, China only produced or acquired around 100 SU-27s and by now many have been retired.
> 
> So now that the truth is know about the SU-27 numbers why would the PLAAF and PLAN start to not only acquire flankers from Russia such as the SU-30 but also continue to produce flanker variants? Could it be because the flanker broke no less then 40 world records? Could it be because the range, weapons payload, maneuverability and flexibility of the flanker platform is unrivaled and quite frankly difficult to match.
> 
> 
> Why don't we see the JH-7, which is much newer than the SU-27 being produced in numbers like we see flankers? Think about it, the JH-7 essentially does the same role as the Flanker, is much newer, and is indigenous, yet China prefers the Flanker wether it be a single seater, multirole double seater, or naval, China chooses the Older Russian designed flanker over the newer JH-7.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet China *ordered KA-31 and KA-28 electronic warfare* helicopters from Russia not too long ago. Why would China order electronics warfare aircraft from Russia when most here claim that Russian avionics are inferior?
> 
> Besides the people from the SAC have no access to the latest Russian avionics, so how would they know this?  Even the KA-31s and KA-28s were export versions and Russia has been know to leave out certain systems on export aircraft.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How would the Chinese believe they had a superior aircraft with superior radar, aerodynamics, weapons, ect if *none of it existed*. Heck even if Russia had a prototype there is no way China could varify the prototypes performance just by looking at it. Why do you think Sukhoi intends to put the pak-fa through 2000 test flights? The designers themselves are not 100% sure about an aircraft's performance until they actually physically test it, and so far the pak-fa is exceeding expectations.
> 
> So in reality, Russia never had a pak-fa to show to China or any systems for the pak-fa, nor did they have any test data from the pak-fa, and the Chinese concluded that they had a superior aircraft?  Keep believing those fairytales from 'insiders' or people at 'SAC'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is ignorance, if the pak-fa is just a flattened flanker then the J-20 is just a black J-10 with an extra vertical stabilizer. Why not just call the F-22 an upgraded F-15?
> 
> There is not one design feature on the pak-fa that is taken from a flanker, in terms of design the pak-fa has less in common with the flanker then the F-22 does with the F-15.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Total nonsense, China purchased KA-31's and KA-28's from Russia, the only reason they purchased these was because of the electronics warfare capabilities, why would China purchase a more expensive specialized version of a helicopter when they could just purchase a cheaper off the shelf helicopter and install their own electronics?
> 
> China purchased the KA-31's and KA-28's even though China has helicopters for anti submarine patrols/electronics warfare.



Buying Russian Ka-31 and Ka-28 is only used as a backup. The main one AEW that will serve onboard CV-16 is domestic Z-8AEW which is more advance and powerful. Russian one which is more inferior will use in lesser important ship. Chinese always do things more precariously. You see US buy many foreign arms from Europe and Israel. Does it mean it is not capable of producing it? By doing it this way,it can reduce production cause and shorter development so that it can quickly mass equipped for lesser important unit.








And also TK-10 prototypes is a non workable aircraft which is not able to use on carrier. This comment is comfirmed by Russian analysis. Buying TK-10 is irrelevant. Even without it, we will still able to make our own J-15. We just buy T-10K as a backup in case we really could not figure out making a carrier version of flanke. See J-15S which is a twin seater and never produced by Russian. May I know which prototype we use as reference since Russian itself never has a twin seater Su-33 version?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PRC2025

ptldM3 said:


> Why don't we see the JH-7, which is much newer than the SU-27 being produced in numbers like we see flankers?
> 
> 
> 
> *My reply*
> 
> Eeh, what? JH-7 is comparable to Su-24. It has nothing to do with Air-Superiority or Multi-role fighters. They are mostly used for bombing strikes against ground targets and supporting ground troops.
> 
> Just as RuAF did against Georgia in August 2008, and still lost several aircraft against a country such as Georgia.
> 
> There is no point for PLAAF to sit with a large number of JH-7. PLAAF is producing 4th and 4.5 gen fighters and is focusing on 5th gen fighters and fighter-bombers, including a new type of JH-7 which is rumored to be on of the J-type series; J-16 or rumored J-18.
> 
> Now, RuAF has around 25 units of newer Su-34. I mean, do you plan on sending Su-24 or the newer Su-34 against F-16, F-15, F-18, F-22 or F-35 ? No, I don't think RuAF plan on doing that. Neither does PLAAF plan on sending JH-7 up against F-16, F-15, etc etc.
> 
> So asking why PLAAF hasn't built more JH-7, is really a useless question. It's like asking why RuAF plan on building total of 120 Su-34 and not more than that. Which is about the same number of JH-7 PLAAF has in service right NOW and is looking to replace them gradually.
> 
> Furthermore, it would be like asking you; since T-50 is so "superior", why does Russia plan on building 1.000 of these fighters but only 200 are for the RuAF? The other 800 are going to other countries. 144 to India, and the rest to other countries.
> 
> I mean, it's strange that RuAF is basically building T-50, only for export, since 80% of all T-50 are going to other countries. 20% only is going to RuAF.
> 
> If we compare this with F-22, 100% are under U.S. control, and if we look at the F-35 number, the U.S. plan on having 80% of all produced F-35s, and only 20% will go to other countries.
> 
> I mean, really, please do explain, why 80% of all planned T-50 PAK-FA are going to countries OUTSIDE Russia?
> 
> However, China on the other hand, will most likely go the same way as the U.S. J-20s only for China and most of the J-31 will also be for PLAAF, and some will be exported, maybe 20-30% of the total numbers.
> 
> So, another question; where is the second stealth fighter for RuAF ? Since RuAF plan on getting only 200 PAK-FA T-50.
> 
> Oh, is it imaginary MiG LMFS, which is still being developed in theory? lol. When is LMFS going to be ready? Do tell
> 
> Let me give you some funny numbers your Russian sourches are operating with, these numbers are from 2010, before J-20 and J-31 being revealed, lol.
> 
> Russia believes in their head that China will import 100 T-50, lol.
> 
> VERY FUNNY QUOTE RIGHT HERE:
> 
> *China (up to 100 units in the years 2025-2035),*
> 
> Russia to export 600 Sukhoi PAK FA fifth generation jets - English pravda.ru
> 
> How is Russian Navy going these days? Oh, I guess straight down the hill from 2015, according to Russian admiral; although I don't need him to confirm what I already know, but it's fun linking to Russian sources, since many of you are in denial.
> 
> Russia losing it's navy:
> 
> Retired admiral says Russia losing its navy | Navy Times | navytimes.com
Click to expand...

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## rcrmj

ptldM3 said:


> your assumption and that is what it is, is false. Ever wonder why advisers at Yakovlev advised the Chinese and Italians when they were building training aircraft? Ever wonder why China purchased the T-10 from Ukraine? If it were so easy to produce airframes none of this would be necessary.


More your assumption from your side, Russian media and rumor keep assuming that any Chinas defence development must have to do with Russians. 

Well tell you what, China went to Brazil for that matter. Because PLAN never wanted to learn their AC fleet and operation standards from Russia but western, and you know that western countries assisting Chinas AC project is virtually impossible.

But since we have been operating flanker families for long so T-10 was the best candidates for AC, and thats why we went for Ukraine only for that matter.

The difference between air force plane and AC plane is vastly different, aerodynamic is just one of minor parts of it, since under the condition of same platform which SAC is very familiar with, so what they need are the short cuts of understanding the rest crucial know-hows.

With current Chinas capability, we can develop J-15 without the T-10 from Ukraine model, however that will take much longer time which we cannot afford.



> Given the right people, resources, funding, and facilities an airframe can be built (with time) but there is no guarantee that it will be very good in terms of flight characteristics, endurance, payload, ect. Again, this is why China continues to built flankers derivatives, it's easier to upgrade a platform then built an entirely new one. Moreover, with the case of the flanker the aircraft is pushing the limits of aviation, it has the range and payload of a light bomber but the manoeuvrability of an aerobatics aircraft.
> You know, anyone can cross check facts and the fact is that the SU-27 was *never* the backbone of the PLAAF, China only produced or acquired around 100 SU-27s and by now many have been retired.
> So now that the truth is know about the SU-27 numbers why would the PLAAF and PLAN start to not only acquire flankers from Russia such as the SU-30 but also continue to produce flanker variants? Could it be because the flanker broke no less then 40 world records? Could it be because the range, weapons payload, maneuverability and flexibility of the flanker platform is unrivaled and quite frankly difficult to match.



Your assumption is partially wrong again. China continues to develop flanker and its derivatives are because it easier to do on a familiar platform, and also, as I said it before, 300 strong flanker families are the backbone of PLAAF and PLAN




> Why don't we see the JH-7, which is much newer than the SU-27 being produced in numbers like we see flankers? Think about it, the JH-7 essentially does the same role as the Flanker, is much newer, and is indigenous, yet China prefers the Flanker wether it be a single seater, multirole double seater, or naval, China chooses the Older Russian designed flanker over the newer JH-7.



You are silly to bring JH-7 into the discussion. JH-7 is no more than a 3rd gen airframe with 4th gen radar, avionics, engine and weapons, designed by none mainstream Xian institution, with the starting date traced back to 70s, when we were still struggling with Mig-21 upgrades J-7 and its variants. And PLAAF never wanted it, in 90s it almost went blue, but handful orders from PLAN saved this plane.

In terms of manoeuverability, airframe, structural and multi purposes, Flanker variants are more capable that JH-7. 






> Yet China *ordered KA-31 and KA-28 electronic warfare* helicopters from Russia not too long ago. Why would China order electronics warfare aircraft from Russia when most here claim that Russian avionics are inferior?
> Besides the people from the SAC have no access to the latest Russian avionics, so how would they know this?  Even the KA-31s and KA-28s were export versions and Russia has been know to leave out certain systems on export aircraft.



Again, China had none experience of building AW helis, buying those are for short cuts, you are over estimating the electronic warfare of Ka-31 or Ka-27. PLAAF and PLAN never wanted to rely their electronic warfare capability on Russians, but our indigenous Y-8 variants, Z-8 AW helis and Y-7 fixed-wing AC board AWACs, plus various electronic pods designed for JH-7, J-10 and Chinese Flanker variants.






> How would the Chinese believe they had a superior aircraft with superior radar, aerodynamics, weapons, ect if *none of it existed*. Heck even if Russia had a prototype there is no way China could varify the prototypes performance just by looking at it. Why do you think Sukhoi intends to put the pak-fa through 2000 test flights? The designers themselves are not 100% sure about an aircraft's performance until they actually physically test it, and so far the pak-fa is exceeding expectations.



Serving air-born AESA, China yes, Russia No, this is the most evident to people have common sense.

And also according to your line of thinking, I can safely say Russia does not have any superior radar, aero, weapons etc if none of it existed



> So in reality, Russia never had a pak-fa to show to China or any systems for the pak-fa, nor did they have any test data from the pak-fa, and the Chinese concluded that they had a superior aircraft?  Keep believing those fairytales from 'insiders' or people at 'SAC'.



So who is more creditable?
A Russian defence enthusiast who reads on internet 
Or
Those one who is developing real fighter jets like J-10, J-11B, J-15, J-16, J-20 and J-31?
I believe not long ago, people were still believing in those clueless Russian assumptions as facts regarding Su-33 deal, arrestor, J-20, J-31 and China buying T-50 and etc````



> This is ignorance, if the pak-fa is just a flattened flanker then the J-20 is just a black J-10 with an extra vertical stabilizer. Why not just call the F-22 an upgraded F-15?
> There is not one design feature on the pak-fa that is taken from a flanker, in terms of design the pak-fa has less in common with the flanker then the F-22 does with the F-15.



Erhhh``the two suspending engine inlets? 
I used colon marks on flattened so dont take it seriously``

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ptldM3

Beast said:


> *Buying Russian Ka-31 and Ka-28 is only used as a backup*.





What does that even mean? personal opinions are now facts? What would this 'backup' be for? In case China cant built an equivalent? Incase they can't meet manufacturing demand? 

China was exporting AEW helicopters to Pakistan while purchasing AEW helicopters from Russia, so supply and demand can't be it. Logic tells us that they did it because the KA-31/28 were the better platform. No one is going to purchase expensive AEW helicopters if they are subpar.



Every time a Chinese member belittles Russian equipment ( which is daily) there is often an example of China purchasing the same equipment from Russia, the excuses are always 'we did it for political reasons' or 'we did it as backup'. Let's get real.






Beast said:


> *The main one AEW that will serve onboard CV-16 is domestic Z-8AEW which is more advance and powerful*. *Russian one which is more inferior will use in lesser important ship. Chinese always do things more precariously*. You see US buy many foreign arms from Europe and Israel. Does it mean it is not capable of producing it? By doing it this way,it can reduce production cause and shorter development so that it can quickly mass equipped for lesser important unit.





*Back it up*. It's China that comes to Russia for AEW systems not the other way around, it also doesn't help that China was purchasing KA-31s and KA-28s from Russia While at the same time selling Pakistan the Z-9EC. And *what chip* are you talking, give me specifics with a link.






Beast said:


> And also TK-10 prototypes is a non workable aircraft which is not able to use on carrier. This comment is comfirmed by Russian analysis. *Buying TK-10 is irrelevant*. Even without it, we will still able to make our own J-15. *We just buy T-10K as a backup in case we really could not figure out* making a carrier version of flanke. See J-15S which is a twin seater and never produced by Russian.





Be honest with yourself, China purchased the T-10 to copy, end of story. 






Beast said:


> May I know which prototype we use as reference since Russian itself never has a twin seater Su-33 version?





One prototype T-10 and production SU-30MKKs gave China the ability to build there J-11BS or whatever it's called.







PRC2025 said:


> Why don't we see the JH-7, which is much newer than the SU-27 being produced in numbers like we see flankers?




Firstly most of your comments are off topic and of little value, in fact they are passive aggressive. In the future I will not answer you if you continue to bring up topics that are none related and provocative. For now I will answer your comments but next time If you deviate from the topic I will not burden myself in replying to random topics.





PRC2025 said:


> Eeh, what? JH-7 is comparable to Su-24. It has nothing to do with Air-Superiority or Multi-role fighters. They are mostly used for bombing strikes against ground targets and supporting ground troops.






So the JH-7 is a close air support aircraft? I think not, at least not a true close air support. The SU-27 can also conduct bombing raids but it's not optimized for it, that job would be better suited for the SU-30 or better yet SU-34. So while we keep hearing that it's easy to produce airframes and Chinese are superior (so they claim) we still see the Chinese building there air force and Navy on a Russian platform which they could have just used the much newer JH-7. Heck they can just uses the same avionics that's in the Chinese flankers and put them in the JH-7 to accomplish the same role.






PRC2025 said:


> Just as RuAF did against Georgia in August 2008, and still lost several aircraft against a country such as Georgia.




What has this got to do with anything? Stay on topic. Half of those losses was to friendly fire and the remaining was relying to heavily on close air support aircraft instead of SEADs aircraft.




PRC2025 said:


> *There is no point for PLAAF to sit with a large number of JH-7. PLAAF is producing 4th and 4.5 gen fighters* and is focusing on 5th gen fighters and fighter-bombers, including a new type of JH-7 which is rumored to be on of the J-type series; J-16 or rumored J-18.




Exactly, they are focusing heavily on Flankers instead of the JH-7 which is a poor argument for Supposed Chinese superiority in designing aircraft.







PRC2025 said:


> Now, RuAF has around 25 units of newer Su-34. I mean, do you plan on sending Su-24 or the newer Su-34 against F-16, F-15, F-18, F-22 or F-35 ? No, I don't think RuAF plan on doing that. Neither does PLAAF plan on sending JH-7 up against F-16, F-15, etc etc.




The SU-34 is based on the SU-27, and it's primary role is SEADs. The SU-34 can also conduct air-to-air but it's not optimized for that role. If Sukhoi wanted to it could just use SU-35 avionics in the SU-34 but that would be a wast considering the SU-34 cockpit was designed for long endurance flights and other components such as landing gear, boom, ect were designed with SEADS. Nevertheless, the SU-34 can perform air-to-air because it still has a strong Flanker lineage.





PRC2025 said:


> So asking why PLAAF hasn't built more JH-7, is really a useless question. It's like asking why RuAF plan on building total of 120 Su-34 and not more than that. Which is about the same number of JH-7 PLAAF has in service right NOW and is looking to replace them gradually.






Hardly a worthless question, there are flanker variants that can perform any role, wether it be air superiority, multirole, maritime, or a bomb truck. The Flanker has much better flexibility then any JH-7, so there would be little need for the JH-7. In other words the Flanker is a superior platform and the Chinese air force recognizes this.




PRC2025 said:


> Furthermore, it would be like asking you; since T-50 is so "superior", why does Russia plan on building 1.000 of these fighters but only 200 are for the RuAF? The other 800 are going to other countries. 144 to India, and the rest to other countries.





Again off topic and a foolish example. The T-50 is going to be expensive. The JH-7 is not, nor is there anything to really augment the T-50 unlike the JH-7.






PRC2025 said:


> If we compare this with F-22, 100% are under U.S. control, and if we look at the F-35 number, the U.S. plan on having 80% of all produced F-35s, and only 20% will go to other countries.




First example, the F-22 is banned for export. The second example, the F-35 was originally supposed to be a cheap aircraft where the US military could afford to replace F-16s and F-15s, instead the F-35 has ballooned in price to where the US may cut orders just like partner countries have, some countries even dropped out of the F-35 program altogether.






PRC2025 said:


> However, China on the other hand, will most likely go the same way as the U.S. J-20s only for China and most of the J-31 will also be for PLAAF, and some will be exported, maybe 20-30% of the total numbers.






That's speculation which runs rampant among Chinese on this forum. Good example, Chinese AEW helicopters are superior to Russian ones because I say so, and the only reason we purchased those Russian helicopters was because of backup, no wait, it was because we replaced crappy Russian avionics, no it was a political statement, or wait it was as a favor to Russia. 





PRC2025 said:


> So, another question; where is the second stealth fighter for RuAF ? Since RuAF plan on getting only 200 PAK-FA T-50.





Stay on topic, those figures of 200 could change anytime just like SU-34 numbers kept increasing. 





PRC2025 said:


> Oh, is it imaginary MiG LMFS, which is still being developed in theory? lol. *When is LMFS going to be ready? Do tell*





When Mig says it's ready. 

yet again off topic, may I add.








PRC2025 said:


> *How is Russian Navy going these days? Oh, I guess straight down the hill from 2015*, according to Russian admiral; although I don't need him to confirm what I already know, but *it's fun linking to Russian sources, since many of you are in denial.
> *
> Russia losing it's navy:




Your link is from 2009 and it's like one paragraph long. Russia is spending over 650 billion on purchasing new military equipment including over 100 naval vessels. Russian shipyards have been delivering new frigates, corvettes, and submarines for the last few years and will continue so.

Again once again, it's completely off topic and low on your part.






rcrmj said:


> More your assumption from your side, Russian media and rumor keep assuming that any China&#8217;s defence development must have to do with Russians.





It's called facts. Fact T-10 was purchased for the J-15 development. Fact J-11, J-15, ect are a copy of a flanker airframe. Fact Yakovlev assisted China. I can keep going.





rcrmj said:


> Well tell you what, China went to Brazil for that matter. Because PLAN never wanted to learn their AC fleet and operation standards from Russia but western, and you know that western countries assisting China&#8217;s AC project is virtually impossible.






Brazil isnt considered 'western', we also have no proof that China didn't ask Russia. For all we know they did but Russia wasn't exactly thrilled at the prospect of training a navy that copied their aircraft design.








rcrmj said:


> Your assumption is partially wrong again. China continues to develop flanker and its derivatives are because it&#8217; easier to do on a familiar platform, and also, as I said it before, 300 strong flanker families are the backbone of PLAAF and PLAN





The Flanker may be familiar to China, but for China to spend as much money as it has on developing different variants of the flanker so it can continue to built up the flanker fleet to serve many decades tells you something about the flanker design.

China continues to built the flanker today and will do so for many more years, these flankers will serve decades. The J-20 and J-31 were designed with one thing in mind, the flanker was design with something else in mind, in other words just because China has the J-20 and J-31 does not mean that either of those aircraft are better then a flanker in terms of payload, range, maneuverability, and mission flexibility.







rcrmj said:


> Again, *China had none experience of building AW helis*, buying those are for short cuts, you are over estimating the electronic warfare of Ka-31 or Ka-27. PLAAF and PLAN never wanted to rely their electronic warfare capability on Russians, but our indigenous Y-8 variants, Z-8 AW helis and Y-7 fixed-wing AC board AWACs, plus various electronic pods designed for JH-7, J-10 and Chinese Flanker variants.





China has helicopters foreign and domestic and China has an electronics industry, so why would it be difficult to put two and two together?

Besides your point is negated by the fact That china did have EW helicopter, in fact China was selling it's Z-9s to Pakistan while acquiring KA-31s and KA-28s.







rcrmj said:


> Serving air-born AESA, China yes, Russia No, this is the most evident to people have common sense.





What difference does it make if it's airborne or ground based? Russia has AESA platforms for everything. 





rcrmj said:


> And also according to your line of thinking, I can safely say Russia does not have any superior radar, aero, weapons etc if none of it existed






You completely do not understand me. You gave an example of how China declined to participate in the pak-fa program by stating China had a superior design, superior radar, superior performance, ect. The problem is that the pak-fa didn't exist nor did any of it's avionics or weapons systems.

The fact that the aircraft didn't exist destroyed that fanboy rumor of 'we had superior design, 'superior radar', 'superior weapons'. 





rcrmj said:


> So who is more creditable?
> A Russian defence enthusiast who reads on internet
> Or
> Those one who is developing real fighter jets like J-10, J-11B, J-15, J-16, J-20 and J-31?
> I believe not long ago, people were still believing in those clueless Russian assumptions as &#8216;facts&#8217; regarding Su-33 deal, arrestor, J-20, J-31 and China &#8216;buying&#8217; T-50 and etc````




What is more logical, believing someone (if they are real) that they have a superior design when the design that they are talking about does not exist or believing someone's bullcrap?

The pak-fa rumor spung around by Chinese fanboys is like Ford claiming that by 2020 they they have a better car then Ferrari, yet Ford knows nothing about how the 2020 Ferrari will perform.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

You compare the latest russian equipment thats coming and there is no comparison.
Only chinese members believe china is more advanced than russia.j-20 is mig1.44 knockoff with modifications.Needs russian engine or won't be any good at all with subpar performance.And people comparing radar tech of russians with chinese.Russia building radar from 50's lol.Chinese just started a few decades back.
Compare the design principle of the upcoming armata withe the latest ZTZ-99 with its flawed turret geometry and u'll know who's ahead in making tanks as well.
Comapre the new stereguschy class corvettes with type 56 corvettes or yasen class SSN with chinese super noisy SSNs and u'll know who's ahead i naval tech.
Chinese drooling in this thread has been funny though.
Just like they declared carrier killer DF-21 operational after 1 test hitting a static large carrier size target in gobi desert,lol.Thats chinese standard of reliability.
Compare chinese tank design philiosophy that is clearly that of a novice with russian or western ones and u get the difference.
Throw in iskander,topol-m,s-500 and u know who calls the shots among china,russia in missile tech.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## armchairPrivate

China just signed a $270B oil deal with Russia. China has paid $60-70B up front. I think that should take care of the trade imbalance. There is no need for China to buy any jet fighters from the Ruskies, I don't think.


----------



## Beast

ptldM3 said:


> What does that even mean? personal opinions are now facts? What would this 'backup' be for? In case China cant built an equivalent? Incase they can't meet manufacturing demand?
> 
> China was exporting AEW helicopters to Pakistan while purchasing AEW helicopters from Russia, so supply and demand can't be it. Logic tells us that they did it because the KA-31/28 were the better platform. No one is going to purchase expensive AEW helicopters if they are subpar.
> 
> 
> 
> Every time a Chinese member belittles Russian equipment ( which is daily) there is often an example of China purchasing the same equipment from Russia, the excuses are always 'we did it for political reasons' or 'we did it as backup'. Let's get real.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Back it up*. It's China that comes to Russia for AEW systems not the other way around, it also doesn't help that China was purchasing KA-31s and KA-28s from Russia While at the same time selling Pakistan the Z-9EC. And *what chip* are you talking, give me specifics with a link.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Be honest with yourself, China purchased the T-10 to copy, end of story.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One prototype T-10 and production SU-30MKKs gave China the ability to build there J-11BS or whatever
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the JH-7 is a close air support aircraft? I think not, at least not a true close air support. The SU-27 can also conduct bombing raids but it's not optimized for it, that job would be better suited for the SU-30 or better yet SU-34. So while we keep hearing that it's easy to produce airframes and Chinese are superior (so they claim) we still see the Chinese building there air force and Navy on a Russian platform which they could have just used the much newer JH-7. Heck they can just uses the same avionics that's in the Chinese flankers and put them in the JH-7 to accomplish the same role.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The SU-34 is based on the SU-27, and it's primary role
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's speculation which runs rampant among Chinese on this forum. Good example, Chinese AEW helicopters are superior to Russian ones because I say so, and the only reason we purchased those Russian helicopters was because of backup, no wait, it was because we replaced crappy Russian avionics, no it was a political statement, or wait it was as a favor to
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's called facts. Fact T-10 was purchased for the J-15 development. Fact J-11, J-15, ect are a copy of a flanker



More like you can't accept the reality of inferior Russian AEW. You are so insistent on KA-31 and KA-28 purchase of yr proof china needed then explain to me why the Z-8AEW is still developed? 

I give you an example. When China is building the beidou II system, China purchase the atomic clock system from Switzerland. The Europe are convinced the China beidou II system will be inferior or even end up not working. Nver they know China manage to produce its own atomic clock with much superior spec. Buying the Switzerland clock is only a backup plan. It never intend to install on Chinese beidou II. 

If China never build a Z-8AEW, I will buy yr explanation. And the fact, Russia now do not allow China just to buy one or two unit. So China needs to buy a few system to get clearance. All this inferior KA-31 will just end up in smaller unit and serving lesser important squadron. The more superior Z-8AEW will based onboard liaonging. 

As for T-10, even without it. We will still able to make our own J-15. Again, the Chinese has plenty of Chinese. We can easily afford this kind of purchase to double ensure the program will progress smoothly even if one failed.
Tell me, twin seat J-15S copy from which Russia prototype? 

Don't tell me you are one of those naive to tell me just added another seat on a existing aircraft and is as simple as that? 
Only layman with no basic military knowledge will say that.


----------



## ptldM3

Beast said:


> More like you can't accept the reality of inferior Russian AEW. You are so insistent on KA-31 and KA-28 purchase of yr proof china needed then explain to me why the Z-8AEW is still developed?
> 
> I give you an example. When China is building the beidou II system, China purchase the atomic clock system from Switzerland. The Europe are convinced the China beidou II system will be inferior or even end up not working. Nver they know China manage to produce its own atomic clock with much superior spec. Buying the Switzerland clock is only a backup plan. It never intend to install on Chinese beidou II.




Long story short, you cant prove that the Z-8 is superior to the KA-31. You can't back your claim about the the superior Chinese 'chip'. Next time spare us your rant, it contains nothing of substance nor does it prove anything.






Beast said:


> *If China never build a Z-8AEW, I will buy yr explanation. And the fact, Russia now do not allow China just to buy one or two unit*. So China needs to buy a few system to get clearance. All this inferior KA-31 will just end up in smaller unit and serving lesser important squadron. The more superior Z-8AEW will based onboard liaonging.




On the contrary, It can be argued that the Z-8 AEW version has barrowed or stolen elements from the KA-31. After all the Chinese military has an apauling record of blatantly copying, breaching contracts, and hacking. And there is good reason why Russia does not allow China to purchase just one or two of anything because China has a history of copying.





Beast said:


> As for T-10, even without it. We will still able to make our own J-15. Again, the Chinese has plenty of Chinese. We can easily afford this kind of purchase to double ensure the program will progress smoothly even if one failed.
> *Tell me, twin seat J-15S copy from which Russia prototype? *




I already did. The Chinese have SU-30MKKs which are twin seater aircraft, and the Chinese have the T-10 which is an SU-33 prototype.

Need I say more?




Beast said:


> Don't tell me you are one of those naive to tell me just added another seat on a existing aircraft and is as simple as that?
> Only layman with no basic military knowledge will say that.




No they didn't just add another seat. The design of the J-15s (front fuselage particularly) is identical to any other SU-30, there is nothing that deviates from the SU-30 meaning they simply copied the SU-30s front fuselage design. Designers and engineers that copied the T-10 and SU30MKK should have no problem incorporating the front fuselage of the SU-30 into the J-15.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

ptldM3 said:


> Long story short, you cant prove that the Z-8 is superior to the KA-31. You can't back your claim about the the superior Chinese 'chip'. Next time spare us your rant, it contains nothing of substance nor does it prove anything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the contrary, It can be argued that the Z-8 AEW version has barrowed or stolen elements from the KA-31. After all the Chinese military has an apauling record of blatantly copying, breaching contracts, and hacking. And there is good reason why Russia does not allow China to purchase just one or two of anything because China has a history of copying.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I already did. The Chinese have SU-30MKKs which are twin seater aircraft, and the Chinese have the T-10 which is an SU-33 prototype.
> 
> Need I say more?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No they didn't just add another seat. The design of the J-15s (front fuselage particularly) is identical to any other SU-30, there is nothing that deviates from the SU-30 meaning they simply copied the SU-30s front fuselage design. Designers and engineers that copied the T-10 and SU30MKK should have no problem incorporating the front fuselage of the SU-30 into the J-15.



Lol. In fact, its you who need to back up your claim. If KA-31 is superior why bother to make to make Z-8AEW? Just buy more and get the job done?

And you are stupid to suggest Su-30MKK is similiar to J-15S. Do you stupidly forget j-15S with canard is built to suit for carrier ops? While Su-30MKK has no canard? Or you are going to use yr layman term to say, jut add a pair of canards and the plane will still fly perfectly?  
China has no canard twin seater plane to model on. It needs to redesign and get the wind tunnel test by itself. 

This more it less show what kind of credibility you have for commenting about military stuff.


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Z-8 is nothing more than french super frelon built under chinese name,chinese army rejected this for russian mi-17v.


----------



## wangwei11607

Rational thinking you've lost
Calm talk more results


----------



## Beast

AUSTERLITZ said:


> Z-8 is nothing more than french super frelon built under chinese name,chinese army rejected this for russian mi-17v.



Nonsense, z-8 army version has been chosen by PLA ARMY. The rejected one is the old one which performs badly in high attitude test. New Z-8 deploy by army uses same system as AC313 and has more powerful Z-9 turboshaft. Once even more powerful Z-16 turboshaft enter service. The performance will even exceed the current one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Beast said:


> Nonsense, z-8 army version has been chosen by PLA ARMY. The rejected one is the old one which performs badly in high attitude test. New Z-8 deploy by army uses same system as AC313 and has more powerful Z-9 turboshaft. Once even more powerful Z-16 turboshaft enter service. The performance will even exceed the current one.



These upgraded z-8K are optimized for SAR[search and rescue operations mostly] with FLIR and searchlight,flare dispenser.


----------



## Beast

AUSTERLITZ said:


> These upgraded z-8K are optimized for SAR[search and rescue operations mostly] with FLIR and searchlight,flare dispenser.



Check out huitong PLA website with pictures and see who is talking nonsense.


----------



## deep hacker here

shuttler said:


> China is an old customer of Russian weapons - correct absolutely
> 
> I think the issues of property rights will be taken care of between us! Thanks for your concern



su 35can match the qualitu of rafale and ur government know it therefore they are being wise.
u guys are very powerfull but not the best noone can be .


----------



## PRC2025

ptldM3 said:


> Firstly most of your comments are off topic and of little value, in fact they are passive aggressive. In the future I will not answer
> 
> So the JH-7 is a close air support aircraft?
> 
> Stay on topic. Half of those losses was to friendly fire and the remaining was relying to heavily on close air support aircraft instead of SEADs aircraft.
> 
> Exactly, they are focusing heavily on Flankers instead of the JH-7 which is a poor argument for Supposed Chinese superiority in designing aircraft.
> 
> The SU-34 is based on the SU-27, and it's primary role is SEADs.
> 
> Again off topic and a foolish example. The T-50 is going to be expensive.
> 
> First example, the F-22 is banned for export. The second example, the F-35 was originally supposed to be a cheap aircraft where the US military could afford to replace F-16s and F-15s, instead the F-35 has ballooned in price to where the US may cut orders just like partner countries have, some countries even dropped out of the F-35 program altogether.
> 
> those figures of 200 could change anytime just like SU-34 numbers kept increasing.
> 
> When Mig says it's ready.
> 
> Your link is from 2009 and it's like one paragraph long.



My reply:

1) You don't like my comments, because they are always backed up with facts and sources, many of them Russian sources, which you keep IGNORING, because you don't like what it says there. It's against your "ego" reading about the collapse of the Russian Navy, and you don't like reading that you have 200 MiG-29 that CAN'T even FLY!

It's nothing "passive agressive" about it. Go to Russian Defence website, and you will see many nationalistic Russians trash everything that has to do with China. Here, we don't trash Russia, and most of us understand that you nor the morons on Russian Defence website represent the majority of the Russian people.

I am just using Russian sources that point ut how BAD the state of the Russian Armed Forces is. Especially the Navy and the Air Force. 

2) Yes, JH-7 is for everything else than sending it against upgraded F-16 and F-18s. We have J-10, J-11, Su-30MKK, J-15 etc for that. Even the most upgraded J-8 we have would be more useful in an air combat than sending JH-7.

Like I said - if anyone was to voilate the Russian airspace, your Su-24 would NOT have been the ones being sent against an enemy aircraft. Your FEW MiG-29 that can still fly alongside Su-27 would have been the aircraft being sent to defend the Russian airspace, and maybe a few MiG-31, but certantly not Su-24, that's for sure.

3) I don't care if you shot down half of your own aircraft - the point is, they were SHOT DOWN and destroyed. It says something about your Air Force, not even being able to target the enemt of a size and strength as Georgia, which didn't had much to begin with. 

4) Read the link from AusAirPower - the Chinese Flankers are a unique family of aircraft, and they are different to your type of aircraft. If we were not happy with what we have produced so far, we would have imported a lot more than just 100 Su-30MKK. You keep whining to China about how we "copied" your Su-27 - yet you continue to sell us your engines without any problems, lol. I like that. 
It's like when U.S. is accusing China of hacking, and now we found out once again how hypocrate the U.S. is.

5) Excatly, as I said, JH-7, Su-24, Su-34 are for SEAD, and attacking target on the GROUND anyway. It has nothing to do with AIR-TO-AIR combat. You cannot send Su-24 and Su-34 against U.S. fighters. Once again, I don't care about your imaginary ideas about how Su-34 can be "equipped". Point is once again, it's NOT equipped to fight F-18 from aircraft carriers or F-16s Block 52, and to mention F-22. So stop the "imaginary" stuff, try to fix those 200 MiG-29 that CAN'T FLY first.

6) Oh, so T-50 is expencive, and therefore you have to export 80% of them outside Russia? Hehe. Funny excuse. It's like when you are bragging about Su-30 and Su-35, which are of course very good planes, but it doesn't help the Russian Air Force much when most of those Su-30 and Su-35 are OUTSIDE Russia, AND your air force is sitting with MiG-29 and Su-27 were many of them CAN'T FLY.

So are we going to hear the same thing about T-50; how wonderful plane it is, yet, 80% of them will be under control of the countries that has nothing to do with the Russian Air Force 

7) Yes, F-22 banned for export, there is a reason for that, it's a very good plane, and U.S. keeps the best for them self, yet Russia is selling their best to everyone else, lol. Now, that's funny.

So let me see if I get this correctly. If there is a conflict between the U.S. and Russia, you will send your 200 T-50 against 2.000 + F-35, LMAO.
Yeah, because 1 T-50 has such a good odds against 10 F-35s, lol.

No matter how many final number the U.S. ends up with regarding F-35, the fact is that a majority of all produced F-35 will be under the U.S. Armed Forces. That's totally different to what Russia is planning, which is where a majority of countries OUTSIDE Russia will OWN the majority of all T-50s. That is not helping the Russian Air Force much, does it.

Oh, you can be sure that most J-20 and J-31 will also be under the PLAAF, and not owned by countries outside China. But of course, you can keep telling yourself otherwise.

8) Of course figures can change from 200 and go up. However, since 2009/2010, the figures have went down, and NOT up. India har reduced to 144. And that Russian source Pravda which estimated that China will buy up to 100 T-50, can also keep dreaming.

So basically, the numbers for T-50 which your Russian sources have calculated in 2010, keep falling throughout 2013. 

9) Yeah, when MiG says it's ready, lol. Guess, it will be a long time until LMFS is operational, if it ever gets operational, it's still there only in theory, and not even one example has been produced yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PRC2025

AUSTERLITZ said:


> You compare the latest russian equipment thats coming and there is no comparison.
> 
> Comapre the new stereguschy class corvettes with type 56 corvettes or yasen class SSN
> Chinese drooling in
> Just like they declared carrier killer DF-21 operational
> Compare chinese tank design philiosophy
> Throw in iskander,topol-m,s-500 and u know who calls the shots among china,russia in missile tech.



You are funny.

Steregusky class, how many do you have? India ZERO. Russia has 2 or 3 of them.

Do you know that Algeria won't buy your Stere-whatever/Tigr-class corvette, and they wen't for upgraded Type 053/F-22P frigates instead. That's how "good" that Russian corvette is. 

I don't even need to mention the fact that Algerians found out that Russian MiG-29s were so useless that they returned them, and prefered rather 16 Su-30, instead of 36 MiG-29SMT. I does say something about how useless all those MiG-29 in the Russian Air Force are. 

2) No one has said anything against Yasen SSN. Russia is better at SSN. However, majority of Chinese subs are SSK. China has a lot better SSK than Russia does. Russia has only a few Kilo-class subs in it's inventory, they are not even upgraded and their combat readiness is definitely questionable.
Furthermore, Yasen and Borei-class subs of Russia and not yet operational and second of all, lets see how long it takes before Russia has 8 of each class as they planned. After all, everything Russia has planned towards 2020, will not be acomplished before 2025 in regards to the rearmament program. There are too many delays and cost problems; not to mention corruption.

3) DF-21 and other missiles are way better than your supah dupah BrahMos, which you couldn't even make without considerable Russian assistance. Don't get me started on SSN. You had to lease one from Russia.

4) T-99 is considered being top 12 in the world alongside T-90. So yeah, they are equally good. However, it doesn't help Russia much having T-90 when once again majority of T-90 are OUTSIDE Russia, mainly in India and Algeria. China on the other hand, keeps their T-99 for them self and have many upgraded T-96 which are about the same level as T-99.

5) Oh really, where is S-500 ? I can't see it anywhere. I guess it's one of the imaginary systems that will be "ready soon" but yet keep being postponed to 2017 according to latest sources. It should have been ready this year according to earlier Russian sources.
Russia is still struggling with producing S-400. They have produced two batallions, which is not nearly enough for the whole Russian airspace.

The question is; is S-400 going to be another system alongside T-90, Russian SSKs such as Improved Kilo-class, Su-30 and Su-35, and even T-50 fighters *where majority of their total numbers are owned by countries outside Russia?*

The U.S. on the other hand, just as China, prefer keeping modern fighters, destroyers, Flankers, J-20, J-31, F-35, F-22, in majority for them self, and doesn't sell like 80% of these to other countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rcrmj

ptldM3 said:


> It's called facts. Fact T-10 was purchased for the J-15 development. Fact J-11, J-15, ect are a copy of a flanker airframe. Fact Yakovlev assisted China. I can keep going.
> .


Where did you find me denying that fact that T-10 was purchased for J-15?
Do you even have the very basic sense of time frame logic of developing a brand new sea-born fighter or based on an existing one?

Yakovlev *assisted *China I doubt it````you can keep going with facts but not your nonsensical Russian clueless boastings

.


> Brazil isnt considered 'western', we also have no proof that China didn't ask Russia. For all we know they did but Russia wasn't exactly thrilled at the prospect of training a navy that copied their aircraft design.
> .


No, indeed brazil isnt considered as western but thats the closest we could get to learn the western standards. Russian are nobody in that area, countries who are looking for AC will not go to the armature Russians, and the one who did (India), was very stressful and unhappy with it.


.


> The Flanker may be familiar to China, but for China to spend as much money as it has on developing different variants of the flanker so it can continue to built up the flanker fleet to serve many decades tells you *something about the flanker design*. .


The *something *is about it is stupid to develop a new 4th gen platform when you already have the one which is doing fine and can be manufactured indigenously. You still dont get this simple logic dont you?


.


> China continues to built the flanker today and will do so for many more years, these flankers will serve decades. The J-20 and J-31 were designed with one thing in mind, the flanker was design with something else in mind, in other words just because China has the J-20 and J-31 does not mean that either of those aircraft are better then a flanker in terms of payload, range, maneuverability, and mission flexibility. .


More of your Kremlin propaganda of flanker takes all advertisement slogans```very amusing indeed!


.


> China has helicopters foreign and domestic and China has an electronics industry, so why would it be difficult to put two and two together?
> .


America has holistic and sophisticated defence industry, why they have to buy rifles, guns, turbo engines and other stuffs from other country?

Having helicopter industry doesnt mean China can build a AW helis in short period of time. Back ups, short cuts are very much needed when we need that capability urgently. 
p.s this is also a common sense

.


> What difference does it make if it's airborne or ground based? Russia has AESA platforms for everything.
> .


 I am surprised to see such an immature and ignorant post coming from a self-proclaimed professor lol


.


> You completely do not understand me. You gave an example of how China declined to participate in the pak-fa program by stating China had a superior design, superior radar, superior performance, ect. The problem is that the pak-fa didn't exist nor did any of it's avionics or weapons systems.
> .


Again its not my opinion, that is what on CJDBY, Tiexue and other major Chinese defence forums, from those people who are working for SAC, CAC, XAC and other defence institutions.
I believe fanboys are not accepted in those institutions, dont you think so?


.


> What is more logical, believing someone (if they are real) that they have a superior design when the design that they are talking about does not exist or believing someone's bullcrap?
> .


It appears to us that you are desperately trying to imply that you are the someone who has developed a superior design, because it is evident that you only believe in your sheer ignorance and denial?
For me I only believe the obvious
1.dramatic decreasing of spending money on Russians weapon after 2003 (even with only second to U.S defence budget and ever increasing desire for better weapons, and western countries still put heavy embargo on China)

2.Russia does not have any serving air-born AESA, its so called 1500 units AESA on T-50 are still under testing if they claimed to be true

3.China has countless air-born platforms that are equipped with AESA namely; KJ-2000, KJ-200, Y-8 AWACs sold to Pakistan, AW heli Z-8, J-15, J-16 and J-10B (this one is still debating whether its PESA or AESA). The third gen AESA AWACs is under development (KJ-3000)

4.Chinas delegation were invited to the Pak-fa project and we turned away
5.There are currently at least 14 sea platforms (served or under construction) that are equipped with Agies system which many western expertise believed that is equivalent to American DDG-51 ARLEIGH BURKE class (a bit of overestimating I believe)

6.Despite the desire for Russia to have its own version of Agies, there are still no serving equivalent systems from Russia, and it is obvious Russian navy (except the subs) is in very bad shape

7.Those *big fishes* from various major Chinese defence forum gained their creditability based on their spot on track records, meanwhile Russian sources have been losing their trust from Chinese since 2000, as most of them were filled with clueless assumptions and over advertising their so called advanced weapons. In contrast, prior to 2003 the trend was the other way around.

So here is the phrase again, would you believe in someones assertion who has never worked closely within the field or someones opinion that who is working with J-20, J-31, J-10 and closely with Russian equipment previously?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

PRC2025 said:


> You are funny.
> 
> Steregusky class, how many do you have? India ZERO. Russia has 2 or 3 of them.
> 
> Do you know that Algeria won't buy your Stere-whatever/Tigr-class corvette, and they wen't for upgraded Type 053/F-22P frigates instead. That's how "good" that Russian corvette is.
> 
> I don't even need to mention the fact that Algerians found out that Russian MiG-29s were so useless that they returned them, and prefered rather 16 Su-30, instead of 36 MiG-29SMT. I does say something about how useless all those MiG-29 in the Russian Air Force are.
> 
> 2) No one has said anything against Yasen SSN. Russia is better at SSN. However, majority of Chinese subs are SSK. China has a lot better SSK than Russia does. Russia has only a few Kilo-class subs in it's inventory, they are not even upgraded and their combat readiness is definitely questionable.
> Furthermore, Yasen and Borei-class subs of Russia and not yet operational and second of all, lets see how long it takes before Russia has 8 of each class as they planned. After all, everything Russia has planned towards 2020, will not be acomplished before 2025 in regards to the rearmament program. There are too many delays and cost problems; not to mention corruption.
> 
> 3) DF-21 and other missiles are way better than your supah dupah BrahMos, which you couldn't even make without considerable Russian assistance. Don't get me started on SSN. You had to lease one from Russia.
> 
> 4) T-99 is considered being top 12 in the world alongside T-90. So yeah, they are equally good. However, it doesn't help Russia much having T-90 when once again majority of T-90 are OUTSIDE Russia, mainly in India and Algeria. China on the other hand, keeps their T-99 for them self and have many upgraded T-96 which are about the same level as T-99.
> 
> 5) Oh really, where is S-500 ? I can't see it anywhere. I guess it's one of the imaginary systems that will be "ready soon" but yet keep being postponed to 2017 according to latest sources. It should have been ready this year according to earlier Russian sources.
> Russia is still struggling with producing S-400. They have produced two batallions, which is not nearly enough for the whole Russian airspace.
> 
> The question is; is S-400 going to be another system alongside T-90, Russian SSKs such as Improved Kilo-class, Su-30 and Su-35, and even T-50 fighters *where majority of their total numbers are owned by countries outside Russia?*
> 
> The U.S. on the other hand, just as China, prefer keeping modern fighters, destroyers, Flankers, J-20, J-31, F-35, F-22, in majority for them self, and doesn't sell like 80% of these to other countries.



1]Ha ha ha,thisdiscussion was between quality of russian and chinese equipment,what does it matter if india has any or not of stereguschy class,russia has 6 and is building around 30.
Just compare it with ur pathetic type 56.
Algeria bought the C28A because they could have 3 for 2 stereguschy,thats the 'quality' of chinese ships.Perfect for poor countries like africa.But pathetic against advanced ones.

2]First time i heard this rant that china has better diesel sub tech than russia.Ha ha ha,then why did u buy so many kilo class?Why are u buying russian navy reject lada class?Lol.
3 borei class have been launched.1 comissioned,other 2 this yr.
Yasen 2 have been launched,1 commisioned this july.Were u sleeping?
As for russian army and all, russia began sweeping military reforms in 2008 and most have been completed by 2013.
They have also went full gear on 650$ billion rearmament drive.

3]Again bringing india into this.DF-21 is a publicity dud.1 test on huge defenseless static target in gobi desert and succesful missile,give me a ******* break.Brahmos is something that actually works.

4]HA HA HA HA, t-99 armata is new generation of MBT altogether.Its head and shoulders above current ones beacuse its design phiosophy is totally different.Its not operational yet.First tank with Unmanned turret,ur comparing it with t-90?LOL.
As for chinese ztz-99 it has serious design flaws due to noob designer.
Here check them out.




Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Russian design philosophy,t-90 and t-84 oplot.
This is the base composite armour.Over which ERA would be placed.
T-90A/S and T-84M Oplot turrets, the same principle of hiding the weak side turret armor, behind strong frontal armor, within vehicle frontal 60-70 degrees arc.
As a comparision, western tanks have thick side turret armor to achieve desired protection levels within their frontal arc.





Uploaded with ImageShack.us
The higher right image clearly shows that edges and turret side are vulnerable from front slant shots,because they are not covered or hidden behind frontal armour arc as in russian design philospohy nor have extensive side armour like western MBts.

Lower right image-Red area is the one with base composite armour on chinese mbt and black colour base composite armour on russian design.Shows that despite bigger turret,chinese design philosophy offers lesser composite armour on frontal arc base armour.Base frontal composite armour in rusian design is thicker and guards the rear and turret sides well.

The higher left armour pic shows question mark on frontal bolted armour.





Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Difference with t-90.NO vulnerability to slant shots,well covered by frontal arc.





Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Weakzones in type-99.





Uploaded with ImageShack.us
More design flaws in chinese turret,exposed large sloped roof.Completely vulnerable to straight shots or even pesky old rpgs.
This design flaw is a result of copycat chinese designer trying to blend in both t-72 design with western design in one tank without understanding completely the design philiosophy,result is a tank that is bigger and has more volume but offers no increase in protection.

5]Again discussion is about tech not numbers?And russia was going through economic problems post soviet breakup thats why small numbers,now they are again moving up.4 units of s-400 is already operational and is far better than anything china has.
china that uses s-300 and s-300 copies.
Even ur destroyers Air defence comes from copied navalized s-300 version,or russian bought sovremenny destroyers themselves,falnker is a russian product,j-20 is modified mig-1.44.
So plz u can stop masturbating on ur superior tech now.



Beast said:


> Check out huitong PLA website with pictures and see who is talking nonsense.



Here from PLA fanboy blogger himself.
http://china-pla.blogspot.in/2007/08/more-on-z-8.html

It admits z-8 versions are for SAR with FLIR and flare dispensers.Wiki and jane's also says so.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PRC2025

AUSTERLITZ said:


> 1]Ha ha ha,thisdiscussion was between quality of russian and chinese equipment,what does it matter if india has any or not of stereguschy class,russia has 6 and is building around 30.
> Just compare it with ur pathetic type 56.
> Algeria bought the C28A because they could have 3 for 2 stereguschy,thats the 'quality' of chinese ships.Perfect for poor countries like africa.But pathetic against advanced ones.
> 
> 2]First time i heard this rant that china has better diesel sub tech than russia.Ha ha ha,then why did u buy so many kilo class?Why are u buying russian navy reject lada class?Lol.
> 3 borei class have been launched.1 comissioned,other 2 this yr.
> As for russian army and all, russia began sweeping military reforms in 2008 and most have been completed by 2013.
> They have also went full gear on 650$ billion rearmament drive.
> 
> 3]Again bringing india into this.DF-21 is a publicity dud.1 test on huge defenseless static target in gobi desert and succesful missile,give me a ******* break.Brahmos is something that actually works.
> 
> 4]HA HA HA HA, t-99 armata is new generation of MBT altogether.



Omg, thanks for a nice laugh! LMAO

Once again, as always, let me show to everyone how you have no idea what you are talking about:

1) Oh, so now Stere-whatever class corvette is NOT chosen according to you, because Algeria is poor? LMAO.

Algeria have 190 billion USD in currency reserves. Do you think they cannot afford these two small corvettes?

Quote:

*The country's external position remained comfortable in 2012, with a trade surplus of about USD 27.18 billion. The current-account surplus is estimated at 8.2% of GDP and official foreign-exchange reserves have been estimated at USD 190.7 billion at end-December 2012*

Algeria - African Economic Outlook

So can I hear you again say, "poor country" ? LMAO. Is that why Algeria has ordered also in addition to Chinese frigates, also two stealth frigates from Germany, because Algeria "cannot afford anything else" ? LOOOOL 

Oh, your Stere-whatever class corvette from Russia is so "good", that even Russians moved along as fast as possible to this one, LOL.

Gremyashchy-class corvette - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2) You can laugh all you want; Russia har just decided that they will build Improved Kilo-class subs for them self for the first time. The Kilos, Russia have from earlier are the old ones, that are not upgraded! Who knows how many of those would even work today if any combat situation occured, LOL. 

3) 1 Borei is launched, but two are being built on old Typhoon steel hulls, lol. That sounds "great" ! 

4) Yeah, Russia started in theory "reforms" after getting their behind kicked in Georgia; they lost too much against a country such as Georgia. As I have documented by a researcher from Harvard, who is Russian by the way, Russia is NOWHERE near close to achieving their rearmament goals. On the contrary, Russia won't be ready with all reforms until 2025.

Russia is so great in building ships and aircraft that Algeria doesn't want their MiG-29 or Stera-whatever class.

Maybe I should ask you, how is Russia doing with your aircraft carrier - only 5 years too late? LMAO.

5) BrahMos works, lol. Yeah, maybe Vietnam can agree on that. How about you keep your BrahMos and we have our DF-series, so stop whining.

6) Oh, I see, another imaginary tank from Russia. As with imaginary LMFS fighter and S-500, loolzz.

Let me guess again; Russia will claim this is a "top tank", and 500-1000 will be sold to other countries, and Russia will build like 100 tanks for them self, LOL.


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

PRC2025 said:


> Omg, thanks for a nice laugh! LMAO
> 
> Once again, as always, let me show to everyone how you have no idea what you are talking about:
> 
> 1) Oh, so now Stere-whatever class corvette is NOT chosen according to you, because Algeria is poor? LMAO.
> 
> Algeria have 190 billion USD in currency reserves. Do you think they cannot afford these two small corvettes?
> 
> Quote:
> 
> *The country's external position remained comfortable in 2012, with a trade surplus of about USD 27.18 billion. The current-account surplus is estimated at 8.2% of GDP and official foreign-exchange reserves have been estimated at USD 190.7 billion at end-December 2012*
> 
> Algeria - African Economic Outlook
> 
> So can I hear you again say, "poor country" ? LMAO. Is that why Algeria has ordered also in addition to Chinese frigates, also two stealth frigates from Germany, because Algeria "cannot afford anything else" ? LOOOOL
> 
> Oh, your Stere-whatever class corvette from Russia is so "good", that even Russians moved along as fast as possible to this one, LOL.
> 
> Gremyashchy-class corvette - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 2) You can laugh all you want; Russia har just decided that they will build Improved Kilo-class subs for them self for the first time. The Kilos, Russia have from earlier are the old ones, that are not upgraded! Who knows how many of those would even work today if any combat situation occured, LOL.
> 
> 3) 1 Borei is launched, but two are being built on old Typhoon steel hulls, lol. That sounds "great" !
> 
> 4) Yeah, Russia started in theory "reforms" after getting their behind kicked in Georgia; they lost too much against a country such as Georgia. As I have documented by a researcher from Harvard, who is Russian by the way, Russia is NOWHERE near close to achieving their rearmament goals. On the contrary, Russia won't be ready with all reforms until 2025.
> 
> Russia is so great in building ships and aircraft that Algeria doesn't want their MiG-29 or Stera-whatever class.
> 
> Maybe I should ask you, how is Russia doing with your aircraft carrier - only 5 years too late? LMAO.
> 
> 5) BrahMos works, lol. Yeah, maybe Vietnam can agree on that. How about you keep your BrahMos and we have our DF-series, so stop whining.
> 
> 6) Oh, I see, another imaginary tank from Russia. As with imaginary LMFS fighter and S-500, loolzz.
> 
> Let me guess again; Russia will claim this is a "top tank", and 500-1000 will be sold to other countries, and Russia will build like 100 tanks for them self, LOL.



Pathetic rant again,
Gremasyschy class is only upgrade of stereguschy class not different ship fool.
Compare ur useless type 56 corvette.The f-22p that china designates 'frigate' is still vastly inferior to the new russian corvettes.
Russian ships are more stealthier,
1 x Arsenal A-190 100mm
2 x MTPU pedestal machine gun 14.5 mm
1 x Kashtan CIWS-M CADS or
12x Redut VLS cells
2 x AK-630&#1052; CIWS
1x8 VL Kh-35 missiles/p-800 oniks
1x6 SS-N-29/RPK-9 Medvedka anti-sub missile
2x4 330mm torpedo tubes (for Paket-NK)
Aircraft carried: Hangar for Ka-27 Helicopter

Compare with chinese f-22p.
8 x YJ-83 SSM in 2 x 4-cell box launchers
1 x 8-cell HQ-7 Surface-to-air missile system
1 x PJ33A dual 100 mm gun (automatic)
4 x Type 76A dual-37 mm AA guns
2 x 6-tube Type 3200 ASW rocket launchers (36 rockets)
2 x DC racks & launcher
6 x torpedo launchers
Harbin z-9C.

The redut VLS sam of russian corvette carries 9M96E medium-range SAM from the s-400 system with range of over 100 kms.
The chinese HQ-7 is pathetic old french crotale copy,a point defence SAM with 15 km range.
Now compare Anti ship missile,Oniks is far better than subsonic c-802.
Nor does it have specialized anti submarine missiles like RPK-9 in russian corvette.

Now compare with type 56.


&#8226; 2× 2-cell YJ-83 (C-803) anti-ship missiles, amidships
&#8226; 1× HQ-10 8-round SAM launcher, aft
&#8226; 1× H/PJ-26 76 mm main gun, forward
&#8226; 2× H/PJ-15 30mm RWSs, amidships
&#8226; 2× triple torpedo tubes

No hangar,just helipad so can only support small helicopters temporarily.An obsolete point defence sam with 6km range,4 ANTI SHIP MISSILES,No ASW rocket launchers....poor in comparison .

2]Russia ordered upgraded kilo class as stopgap measure since lada failed,the same lada that ur navy buying.Also how is russia ordering kilos proof of chinese tech?Kilo itself is russian tech,chinese buy it coz they can't produce anything as good.

3]Total nonsense,borei are completely different subs.One typhoon was used as testbed for bulava missile.Two boreis were built from metal hull of unfinished akula class SSNs not 'old' typhoon hulls,that doesn't change anything only reduces cost.

4]Yes russia introduced reforms after georgia war,and reforms have been ongoing.Even if they are completed around 2025 ur point?Russian tech is still miles ahead of chinese.

Chinese tech is so great that despite economic benefit offers,myanmar dumped latest 'super duper' j-10 and went for 'old' russian mig-29.FAIL.

5]Agreed we are far more comfortable with a missile that works and not propaganda missile.

6]Not imaginery but as usual u are a ignorant idiot.The armata is a revolutionary new generation tank,a toned down version of the t-95 .It will be unvieled later this year.
This is the pic of t-95.




Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Russia is undergoing massive modernization,It has stated armata will replace all existing tanks except late t-90,and equip upto 2300 tanks.
Also what happened o your boast of chinese tech,after i showed u in previous post with diagrams how pathetic the ztz-99 design really is compared to russian or western tank design.I see you quietly ignored that.After that how did u manage the gall to compare ur tank tech to russian.


----------



## Beast

AUSTERLITZ said:


> Pathetic rant again,
> Gremasyschy class is only upgrade of stereguschy class not different ship fool.
> Compare ur useless type 56 corvette.The f-22p that china designates 'frigate' is still vastly inferior to the new russian corvettes.
> Russian ships are more stealthier,
> 1 x Arsenal A-190 100mm
> 2 x MTPU pedestal machine gun 14.5 mm
> 1 x Kashtan CIWS-M CADS or
> 12x Redut VLS cells
> 2 x AK-630&#1052; CIWS
> 1x8 VL Kh-35 missiles/p-800 oniks
> 1x6 SS-N-29/RPK-9 Medvedka anti-sub missile
> 2x4 330mm torpedo tubes (for Paket-NK)
> Aircraft carried: Hangar for Ka-27 Helicopter
> 
> Compare with chinese f-22p.
> 8 x YJ-83 SSM in 2 x 4-cell box launchers
> 1 x 8-cell HQ-7 Surface-to-air missile system
> 1 x PJ33A dual 100 mm gun (automatic)
> 4 x Type 76A dual-37 mm AA guns
> 2 x 6-tube Type 3200 ASW rocket launchers (36 rockets)
> 2 x DC racks & launcher
> 6 x torpedo launchers
> Harbin z-9C.
> 
> The redut VLS sam of russian corvette carries 9M96E medium-range SAM from the s-400 system with range of over 100 kms.
> The chinese HQ-7 is pathetic old french crotale copy,a point defence SAM with 15 km range.
> Now compare Anti ship missile,Oniks is far better than subsonic c-802.
> Nor does it have specialized anti submarine missiles like RPK-9 in russian corvette.
> 
> Now compare with type 56.
> 
> 
>  2× 2-cell YJ-83 (C-803) anti-ship missiles, amidships
>  1× HQ-10 8-round SAM launcher, aft
>  1× H/PJ-26 76 mm main gun, forward
>  2× H/PJ-15 30mm RWSs, amidships
>  2× triple torpedo tubes
> 
> No hangar,just helipad so can only support small helicopters temporarily.An obsolete point defence sam with 6km range,4 ANTI SHIP MISSILES,No ASW rocket launchers....poor in comparison .
> 
> 2]Russia ordered upgraded kilo class as stopgap measure since lada failed,the same lada that ur navy buying.Also how is russia ordering kilos proof of chinese tech?Kilo itself is russian tech,chinese buy it coz they can't produce anything as good.
> 
> 3]Total nonsense,borei are completely different subs.One typhoon was used as testbed for bulava missile.Two boreis were built from metal hull of unfinished akula class SSNs not 'old' typhoon hulls,that doesn't change anything only reduces cost.
> 
> 4]Yes russia introduced reforms after georgia war,and reforms have been ongoing.Even if they are completed around 2025 ur point?Russian tech is still miles ahead of chinese.
> 
> Chinese tech is so great that despite economic benefit offers,myanmar dumped latest 'super duper' j-10 and went for 'old' russian mig-29.FAIL.
> 
> 5]Agreed we are far more comfortable with a missile that works and not propaganda missile.
> 
> 6]Not imaginery but as usual u are a ignorant idiot.The armata is a revolutionary new generation tank,a toned down version of the t-95 .It will be unvieled later this year.
> This is the pic of t-95.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uploaded with ImageShack.us
> 
> Russia is undergoing massive modernization,It has stated armata will replace all existing tanks except late t-90,and equip upto 2300 tanks.
> Also what happened o your boast of chinese tech,after i showed u in previous post with diagrams how pathetic the ztz-99 design really is compared to russian or western tank design.I see you quietly ignored that.After that how did u manage the gall to compare ur tank tech to russian.



So desperate and pathetic of yr attempt. Why compare 056 and talk about HQ-7. Clearly you know something called HQ-16 and HQ-9 and you refuse to talk abt it. 

PLAN 054A frigate is capable of multiple air threat engagement due to VLS while Russian navy frigate has none. Not to mention none of Russian navy ship has PHASED ARRAY radar.


----------



## ptldM3

PRC2025 said:


> 4) *Yeah, Russia started in theory "reforms" after getting their behind kicked in Georgia*; they lost too much against a country such as Georgia. As I have documented by a researcher from Harvard, who is Russian by the way, Russia is NOWHERE near close to achieving their rearmament goals. On the contrary, Russia won't be ready with all reforms until 2025.




 Was this before or after Georgians soldiers started retreating and deserting? Or did this 'behind kicking' start after Georgian positions and convoys were destroyed and burning?

Show me last time China faced a military then talk. Because as I recall China got hammered by Vietnam. 

Now, coming back to your low and tasteless comment. Georgia fell in five days, dispute being much better equipped and trained. Georgia also took heavier losses dispute a surprise attack on a Russian military barracks which accounted for a good porting of Russia's KIA and wounded, dispute Georgia's classless tactic of killing piece keepers, they suffered heavier casualties.

Russian military planing and execution was highly regarded in that conflict, logistics and rapid troop deployment was also seen as impressive. The only thing that was lacking was better communication equipment and more emphasis on SEADs rather then just close air support.

In the end of the day Russia did very well considering most unites were using outdated equipment. The only weakness was air-ground coordination which resulted in a number of friendly fire on Russian aircraft--in defense Georgia used the same type of aircraft so misidentification is not sup rising. Other then that Georgia has a relatively strong air defense network.




PRC2025 said:


> Russia is so great in building ships and aircraft that Algeria doesn't want their MiG-29 or Stera-whatever class.




Did Myanmar not choose the Mig-29 over the J-10? Want to compare resumes, take a look at which countries sell more military equipment and who the buyers are. Russia sells military equipment to every part of the world including some NATO countries while Chinese arms are sold to a few African countries and Pakistan.







PRC2025 said:


> 6) Oh, I see, another imaginary tank from Russia. As with imaginary LMFS fighter and S-500, loolzz.



Someone jealous? The only thing you forgot to do was claim that the Chinese Type-99 is superior to the Armata and the dung missile to be superior to the S-500. But I'm sure we can see that in your next post, if not some other Chinese cheerleader will say it. 

'China weapon suuperiooo to Russia. China weary strong. We invent evreeey thing, wootout us, white man still run awound like monkey'


----------



## Beast

ptldM3 said:


> Was this before or after Georgians soldiers started retreating and deserting? Or did this 'behind kicking' start after Georgian positions and convoys were destroyed and burning?
> 
> Show me last time China faced a military then talk. Because as I recall China got hammered by Vietnam.
> 
> Now, coming back to your low and tasteless comment. Georgia fell in five days, dispute being much better equipped and trained. Georgia also took heavier losses dispute a surprise attack on a Russian military barracks which accounted for a good porting of Russia's KIA and wounded, dispute Georgia's classless tactic of killing piece keepers, they suffered heavier casualties.
> 
> Russian military planing and execution was highly regarded in that conflict, logistics and rapid troop deployment was also seen as impressive. The only thing that was lacking was better communication equipment and more emphasis on SEADs rather then just close air support.
> 
> In the end of the day Russia did very well considering most unites were using outdated equipment. The only weakness was air-ground coordination which resulted in a number of friendly fire on Russian aircraft--in defense Georgia used the same type of aircraft so misidentification is not sup rising. Other then that Georgia has a relatively strong air defense network.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did Myanmar not choose the Mig-29 over the J-10? Want to compare resumes, take a look at which countries sell more military equipment and who the buyers are. Russia sells military equipment to every part of the world including some NATO countries while Chinese arms are sold to a few African countries and Pakistan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Someone jealous? The only thing you forgot to do was claim that the Chinese Type-99 is superior to the Armata and the dung missile to be superior to the S-500. But I'm sure we can see that in your next post, if not some other Chinese cheerleader will say it.
> 
> 'China weapon suuperiooo to Russia. China weary strong. We invent evreeey thing, wootout us, white man still run awound like monkey'



The competition between j-10 and mig-29 for Myanmar Air Force is a lie. China never offer J-10 for them. At that time, j-10
Is not for export. The only country J-10 offer for export is Pakistan Air Force.

Stop kidding yrself.  those rubbish western news can never be trusted.


----------



## ptldM3

Beast said:


> Lol. In fact, its you who need to back up your claim.




I havnt made any claim, it is *you* that that keeps claiming China is superior in everything. I asked you to back your claims multiple times and so far you havnt provided a shred of evidence to support your claim. So where is the source for that 'superior chip'? 





Beast said:


> If KA-31 is superior why bother to make to make Z-8AEW? Just buy more and get the job done?




Wonderful logic, if that is the case then the Tejas is superior to the SU-30mki and SU-30SM is superior to the SU-35.




Beast said:


> And you are stupid to suggest Su-30MKK is similiar to J-15S. *Do you stupidly forget j-15S with canard is built to suit for carrier ops? While Su-30MKK has no canard*? Or you are going to use yr layman term to say, jut add a pair of canards and the plane will still fly perfectly?
> China has no canard twin seater plane to model on. *It needs to redesign* and get the wind tunnel test by itself.



China Redesigned the flanker because they copied canards?  No one is claiming that China didn't run the J-15s through the wind tunnel, it would be negligent of them not to. The problem is when people like yourself start to act like the J-15s is some kind of original design.

If Russia wanted a J-15s they would literally take an SU-30, add an arresting hook, install reinforced landing gears from the SU-33 and incorporate the SU-33s folding wings. Of course this would require various testing but at the end of the day it would be a naval SU-30.





Beast said:


> This more it less show what kind of credibility you have for commenting about military stuff.




Unlike you I have at least flown aircraft, what is your aviation background?


----------



## ptldM3

Beast said:


> The competition between j-10 and mig-29 for Myanmar Air Force is a lie. China never offer J-10 for them. At that time, j-10
> Is not for export. The only country J-10 offer for export is Pakistan Air Force.
> 
> Stop kidding yrself.  *those rubbish western news can never be trusted*.



I will totally believe China when they say they never offered J-10 for export, just like how they purchased an aircraft carrier to built a casino. The Chinese never lie

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Beast said:


> So desperate and pathetic of yr attempt. Why compare 056 and talk about HQ-7. Clearly you know something called HQ-16 and HQ-9 and you refuse to talk abt it.
> 
> PLAN 054A frigate is capable of multiple air threat engagement due to VLS while Russian navy frigate has none. Not to mention none of Russian navy ship has PHASED ARRAY radar.



You are ofcourse comparing corvettes to frigate and destroyer systems.
Russians have none on standrad ships because right now what they field are old soviet systems and now with funds comng in they are just beginning deploying new gen systems.Its not a matter of tech,russia was deploying ground based phased array radars in 1970s.
Russia does field phased array radra system on its aircraft carrier kuznetsov though.
Here russia to deploy phased array radras on its new ships-
New Russian Corvettes to get Phasotron-NIIR Advenced Radars >> Naval Today
Also u completely ignored the new russian admiral gorshkov type frigates which will have phased array radars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Admiral_Gorshkov-class_frigate
The Adm. Gorshkov
Admiral gorshkov is true multipurpose frigate-combining best features of both udaloy and sovremenny soviet era designs.


----------



## cnleio

ptldM3 said:


> I will totally believe China when they say they never offered J-10 for export, just like how they purchased an aircraft carrier to built a casino. The Chinese never lie


Not about J-10A and Mig-29 business competition, it's just a deal with Russia that any China aircraft using AL-31 jet engine won't export to third country. China bought AL-31 from Russia only install on PLAAF's fighter forbid to export. Although now PLAAF own 600x 3gen fighters(J-10A,J-11/J-11B,Su30mkk/Su30mk2,JH-7A) it's still not enough for today China defense, China wanna 1000x fighters that need more jet engines. 

Currently China only export JF-17 (RD-93 jet engine). After J-10B (domesitc WS-10A jet engine) test finish, J-10B has the chance to export foreign nations but not J-10A .


----------



## Beast

ptldM3 said:


> I will totally believe China when they say they never offered J-10 for export, just like how they purchased an aircraft carrier to built a casino. The Chinese never lie


 So good of yr lumping of news together. So desperate of u trying to lump carrier with J-10? So this is all you can to prove china offer J-10 to Myanmar airforce?  
I want concrete evidence not useless ranting of smearing.


----------



## cnleio

In Chinese military forum, i read some Russian news agency said has signed Su-35 export deal with China in 2013 Paris Air Show, export 100x Su-35 to China ??? Does Russia official prove the truth ? I didn't hear China news yet. 



> &#25454;&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#20043;&#22768;&#30005;&#21488;&#32593;&#31449;6&#26376;22&#26085;&#25253;&#36947;&#65292;&#20013;&#20420;&#20004;&#22269;&#22312;&#26412;&#27425;&#24052;&#40654;&#33322;&#23637;&#26399;&#38388;&#24050;&#36798;&#25104;&#32422;100&#26550;&#33487;-35&#20986;&#21475;&#21327;&#35758;&#12290;
> 
> &#22312;&#24067;&#23572;&#27463;&#26426;&#22330;&#20030;&#34892;&#30340;&#31532;50&#23626;&#24052;&#40654;&#33322;&#23637;&#19978;&#65292;&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#27966;&#20986;&#20102;&#36817;&#24180;&#26469;&#26368;&#24378;&#22823;&#30340;&#21442;&#23637;&#38453;&#23481;&#12290;&#20420;&#26041;&#20849;&#26377;46&#23478;&#20844;&#21496;&#21442;&#23637;&#65292;&#33487;&#38669;&#20234;&#12289;&#31859;&#26684;&#12289;&#20234;&#23572;&#12289;&#20234;&#23572;&#24211;&#29305;&#12289;&#23433;&#27888;&#12289;&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#22269;&#38450;&#20135;&#21697;&#20986;&#21475;&#20844;&#21496;&#31561;&#33879;&#21517;&#20891;&#24037;&#21378;&#21830;&#24713;&#25968;&#21040;&#22330;&#12290;&#22312;&#23637;&#21381;&#12289;&#38706;&#22825;&#23637;&#22330;&#21644;&#33322;&#31354;&#34920;&#28436;&#36807;&#31243;&#20013;&#65292;&#35266;&#20247;&#24471;&#20197;&#30446;&#30585;&#20420;&#32599;&#26031;&#33322;&#31354;&#24037;&#19994;&#30340;&#26368;&#26032;&#25104;&#23601;&#12290;


----------



## Navigator

cnleio said:


> In Chinese military forum, i read some Russian news agency said has signed Su-35 export deal with China in 2013 Paris Air Show, export 100x Su-35 to China ??? Does Russia official prove the truth ? I didn't hear China news yet.



Russian news agencies didn't report anything like that, was reported only that negotiations are continuing in agreement contract

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

Su35 can kick *** of all Chinese fighters in our existing inventory, no more pompous talking please. 100 SU35 is very advisable proposal.


----------



## ptldM3

Beast said:


> So good of yr lumping of news together. So desperate of u trying to lump carrier with J-10?




The carrier was an example of China outright lying. This was a response to you claiming not to trust the western media and instead trust China. How can we trust China when they spoon fed everyone a lie about the Varyag being a Casino?

No wonder your post are incoherent and unsystematic, you can't read or comprehend.







Beast said:


> So this is all you can to prove china offer J-10 to Myanmar airforce?
> *I want concrete evidence* not useless ranting of smearing.



Wow, you demand evidence, but have not given me one single source. 

There are multiple none Russian sources reporting that Myanmar chose the Mig-29 over the J-10, like this:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...=UZa-CVqkmbDyOP3A89JRMw&bvm=bv.48340889,d.cGE

Now where is my concrete evidence?

As for your accusation of accusing me of ranting and smearing, that is funny considering it is you that has been ranting in an attempt to avoid answering me when I asked you to prove your claim. Furthermore, where have I smeared China? Point it out, saying that the J-15s is a copy of the flanker design is not smearing anyone, it's call reality, same for the JH-7 argument. Have I ever made a claim that said that Chinese technology sucks or that Russian technology is better? No, on the other hand you have. Although I can rightfully claim Russia is better at this or that, I don't go around doing that because quite frankly I would look like an loser and a douche that pounds his chest.


----------



## ptldM3

wanglaokan said:


> Su35 can kick *** of all Chinese fighters in our existing inventory, no more pompous talking please. 100 SU35 is very advisable proposal.



The SU-35 is an amazing piece of technology and I give credit to the Chinese aviation industry. Unfortunately, unprovoked attacks against Russia has become common around here. It's hard to find one thread where someone doesn't take cheap shots.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

ptldM3 said:


> The SU-35 is an amazing piece of technology and I give credit to the Chinese aviation industry. Unfortunately, unprovoked attacks against Russia has become common around here. It's hard to find one thread where someone doesn't take cheap shots.



Yeh ,its a total beast.Outclasses current MKI.This deal is threat to IAF.


----------



## ptldM3

AUSTERLITZ said:


> Yeh ,its a total beast.Outclasses current MKI.This deal is threat to IAF.




The only thing to remember is that Russia can take out or replace certain avionics which it has done before.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

ptldM3 said:


> The only thing to remember is that Russia can take out or replace certain avionics which it has done before.



Oh i'm quite sure IRbis PESA will be downgraded.Its still PESA though very powerful,inferior to AESA that is now norm.Even with downgraded irbis it outclasses mki due to reduced RCS,3dTVC,better radar.Till we get super sukhoi.


----------



## 帅的一匹

ptldM3 said:


> The only thing to remember is that Russia can take out or replace certain avionics which it has done before.


We want the best version of SU35, a water down version will fall off the mark.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PRC2025

AUSTERLITZ said:


> Pathetic rant again,
> Gremasyschy class is only upgrade of stereguschy class not different ship fool.
> Compare ur useless type 56 corvette.The f-22p that china designates 'frigate'
> Russian ships are more stealthier
> Russia ordered upgraded kilo class as stopgap measure since lada failed,the same lada that ur navy buying
> 
> Even if they are completed around 2025 ur point?Russian tech is still miles ahead of chinese.
> 
> Chinese tech is so great that despite economic benefit offers,myanmar dumped latest 'super duper' j-10 and went for 'old' russian mig-29.FAIL.
> Not imaginery but as usual u are a ignorant idiot.
> Russia is undergoing massive modernization,It has stated armata will replace all existing tanks except late t-90,and equip upto 2300 tanks.



1) Once again, you are serving a lot of c-r-a-p, and you are calling other people names. It's funny, I just have to laugh, because you don't have any argument. You only reply to what you "can" reply to; which fits you - and even that is not even based on facts.

Let's start:

2) Stera-whatever class corvette is produced in extremely limited number, and Russians are not happy with them. Furthermore, once again, Algeria which has 190 billion USD reserves and which you called "poor", prefers Chinese and German frigates, and not your supah dupah 1800 tonn Stera-whatever class corvette from Russia.

Grema-whatever class which is an "upgrade" of Stera-whatever class corvette, is not even ready. Russia expect first of these corvettes to enter service in 2015, if that ever happens.

3) I know you hate F-22P frigates, which are by the way designed as "light frigates". It's because Pakistan is receiving them. China on the other hand does not use these light frigates since China already have 15 Type 054A stealthy frigates in service already. Another 3 are being built and 2 more will be built, total of 20. This will be done by 2015. Which means China will have 20 Type 054A stealth frigates in service by the time 1st Supah Dupah Grema-whatever class corvette has been commisioned. These are 4300 ton ships compared to your small corvettes.

Second of all, alongside Pakistan and Thailand, Algeria have ordered these frigates, clearly better than Supar Dupah 1800 ton Stera-whatever class corvette 

Now, Thailand wants to buy 3 Type 054A stealthy frigates and is competing against the U.S. 3000 ton L-Combat Ship (LCS). Thailand seem to prefer 054A, since Thailand has already bought other earlier versions of Chinese frigates several years ago.

Jane's: China intends to Thailand export 3 054 the frigate (Figure) - Military News

This means most likely, that the model of even newer 054B frigate is ready around 2015. However, In contrast to you, I don't put much weight to imaginary projects which haven't been produced yet. Therefore I am rather pointing out that China has 15 054A already in service, and will have additional 3 in 2014, and additional 2 in 2015, total of 20. That is something we can be sure off, compared to Russians who are talking about lets say Admiral Gorskhov frigate which still does NOT have one single frigate operational. 

2 Gorskhov frigates is being built as we speak, and is expected to be ready in 2015, LOL. 1 Grema-whatever class corvette is expected to be ready in 2015.

So to sum this up. 2 Gorskhov frigate and 1 Grema-corvette in 2015 will be ready VERSUS 20 Type 054A frigates, 6 Type 054C destroyers, and at least 4 Type 052D destroyers.

You still wanna do the numbers which ships are better, not to mention who has more of them 2013-2014-2015 timeline ?

Russia has planned up to 20 Gorskhov frigates. Do you seriously think Russia will be able to build that by 2020, when you look at the fact that 1st and 2nd frigate will be ready in 2014?

Here is your socalled "state-of-the-art" frigate; according once again to Russian sources, it wil WAY TO EXPENCIVE.

State-of-the-art frigates too expensive for Russia - English pravda.ru

What has Russia done to compensate for SLOW and EXPENCIVE building? Russia has gone to Admiral Grigorovich-class frigate which is LIGHTER than Gorskhov-class frigate. That means Russia is going BACK on building ships, while PLANs ships are getting stealthier, bigger, more armed and advances and more in numbers.

So by 2015, Russias fleet of new ships will be 3 Grigorovich-class frigates (3850 ton), 2 Gorkhov frigates (4500 ton) and 1 Grema-whatever class corvette (2200 ton) 

VERSUS 

20 Type 054A frigates (4300 ton), 6 Type 052C destroyers (7000 ton), at least 4 052D destroyers (7500-7800 ton)

And you are sitting here and telling us that "Russian ships are soooooo amazing" and sooo much stealthier and sooooooo much better armed, LMAO. 

So please keep whining about how "useless" Type 056 corvette is, while we are building 054A, soon 054B and 052C and 052D destroyers. I am sure you were laughing when we produced 84 Type 022 missile boats which pack 8 anti-ship missiles each, total of 672 anti-ship missiles on those 84 stealth missile boats. However missile boats nor 056 corvettes are the back of our navy as we speak. It's 054A and soon 054B, 052C and 052D against your Supah Dupah Gorskhov and Grigorovich-class frigates that are not even operational, LOL.

4) Yeah, Russia is building Improved Kilo-class for themselves because Russia doesn't have any! LOL. That's funny, because all Improved Kilo-class subs are after all exported to other countries.

I am not sure it helps the Russian Navy bragging about Improved Kilo-class SSK when they have 0 Improved Kilo-class subs and is sitting only with old Kilo-class subs with highly questionable combat readiness. China on the other hand has 12 Improved Kilo-class subs. India har only 5 Improved Kilo-class subs, and 5 standard Kilo-class subs. 

Algeria which you called poor and showed your low intelligence, has 4 Improved Kilo-class subs now, and Vietnam which is poor will even have 6 of them by 2017. 

It doesn't help much for the Russian Navy when they have 0 today, does it? LOL.

There is NO deal for Lada-class yet. If there is, it is going to be joint-project between Russia and China. Rumor about buying Su-35 has been on since 2008. 

Once again, point is Russia itself failed to produce Lada-class by themselves, and China is NOT buying anything that Russia can't even produce for their customer. I really don't know where you head is, but it is definitely not on your shoulders.

J-10 was never in competition in Myanmar - however, China has sold older frigates to Myanmar which Myanmar wanted, and they got them. Now Thailand will most likely get a lot bigger and better frigates from China, where China will most likely win over the U.S. counterpart in Thailand. 

So the only FAIL here, must be your lies which you present time and time, hoping no one will call you out, while you are calling others for idiot. I will refrain from calling you that, since I can't stop laughing here, and it is highly questionable why I even am replying to you. It's more to show everyone how you lie - people might start believing your fantasies, but I don't have much time to waste either way, so this is my last reply to your lies and name calling.

6) Once again, imaginary stuff just as LMFS. Russia "stating". I think I have already produced more than enough evidence, when Russia is "stating something" it always comes out very late, more expencive than planned and in small numbers.

The same thing about "wonderful" T-50 that will be owned by the majority of other countries, and not by Russia itself. 200 for Russia, and more than 750-800 for other countries, LOL.

Just as you stated that T-50 will be ready in 2015, back in 2010. Now it's in 2016, and many are saying 2017. 

Just as you stated that India will buy 200 of these, now it's 144.

Just as Russian sources stated that China will buy up to 100 T-50 only months before J-20 and J-31 were revealed. Now China will buy ZERO T-50.

Now, once again, Russia is "stating" that this MBT will be ready in 2015 and that 2300 units will be produced by 2020, which is total BS. Russia is claiming faster production rate than the U.S. in another words, for a product that is supposed to be even better than M1A2 Abrams. Don't make me laugh, seriously.

Russia might produce Armata in 2015. But the numbers Russia is operating with should be adjusted, such as taking a number 0 away of the original number. I think 230 units might be more realistic, and not 2300.

So far everyone know that you are bragging about wonderful Russian weapons such as:

1) T-90 MBT
2) Improved Kilo-class SSK
3) Su-30
4) Su-35
5) T-50

Yet, number 1, 2, 3 and 4 on my list is owned in majority by other countries, while there are very few T-90 in Russian Armed Forces, ZERO Improved Kilo-class subs, no more than 6 or 10 Su-30 and barely introducing Su-35 which you clearly alongside T-50 also plan selling majority of total production numbers to other countries.

I am sure in a case of conflict, it counts a lot for Russian Armed Forces knowing that while other countries have T-90, Improved Kilo-class subs, Su-30 and soon Su-35, the Russians would have to fight today with old Kilo-class SSK, majority of their tanks being old T-72, 200 of their 291 MiG-29 CAN'T even fly and who knows how many of those Su-27 can fly too.

While Russia is towards modernization throughout 2025 and having all these plans on the paper, China is already ahead, and you also think China will sit still from 2013-2025, right?  Right, LOL.

I wish you luck with your 2 Gorskhov class frigates in 2015, alongside 3 Grigorovich and 1 Supah Dupah Gre-whatever class corvette. 
And we will have fun having our 20 Type 054A frigates, 6 Type 052C and 4 Type 052D by 2015, alongside not only 12 Improved Kilo-class subs but also 14-15 Song-class SSK and 8 + Yuan/Improved Yuan class SSK, total of more than 34-35 SSK.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Fsjal

I wonder why Russia sells their best weapons to foreign nations. Must be for money.


----------



## Navigator

Fsjal said:


> I wonder why Russia sells their best weapons to foreign nations. Must be for money.



To make production cheaper for itself. The greater the volume of production, the lower the cost of each machine
According Pogosyan, Russia is going to produce about 200 Su-35, 100 for itself and 100 for export to other countries.


> The mighty Sukhoi Su-35 lancing through the Le Bourget sky this week is just the beginning of the type&#8217;s international exposure, according to Mikhail Pogosyan.The head of Sukhoi&#8216;s parent company, United Aircraft, is forecasting 200 sales of the type, split 50:50 between domestic and export. There are 48 currently on order so far by the Russian military and Pogosyan is eyeing 100 export sales, which should come from existing customers of Sukhoi or MiG jets.


air-show.co/military-aviation-news/paris-pogosyan-sees-market-for-200-su-35s/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

PRC2025 said:


> 1) Once again, you are serving a lot of c-r-a-p, and you are calling other people names. It's funny, I just have to laugh, because you don't have any argument. You only reply to what you "can" reply to; which fits you - and even that is not even based on facts.
> 
> Let's start:
> 
> 2) Stera-whatever class corvette is produced in extremely limited number, and Russians are not happy with them. Furthermore, once again, Algeria which has 190 billion USD reserves and which you called "poor", prefers Chinese and German frigates, and not your supah dupah 1800 tonn Stera-whatever class corvette from Russia.
> 
> Grema-whatever class which is an "upgrade" of Stera-whatever class corvette, is not even ready. Russia expect first of these corvettes to enter service in 2015, if that ever happens.
> 
> 3) I know you hate F-22P frigates, which are by the way designed as "light frigates". It's because Pakistan is receiving them. China on the other hand does not use these light frigates since China already have 15 Type 054A stealthy frigates in service already. Another 3 are being built and 2 more will be built, total of 20. This will be done by 2015. Which means China will have 20 Type 054A stealth frigates in service by the time 1st Supah Dupah Grema-whatever class corvette has been commisioned. These are 4300 ton ships compared to your small corvettes.
> 
> Second of all, alongside Pakistan and Thailand, Algeria have ordered these frigates, clearly better than Supar Dupah 1800 ton Stera-whatever class corvette
> 
> Now, Thailand wants to buy 3 Type 054A stealthy frigates and is competing against the U.S. 3000 ton L-Combat Ship (LCS). Thailand seem to prefer 054A, since Thailand has already bought other earlier versions of Chinese frigates several years ago.
> 
> Jane's: China intends to Thailand export 3 054 the frigate (Figure) - Military News
> 
> This means most likely, that the model of even newer 054B frigate is ready around 2015. However, In contrast to you, I don't put much weight to imaginary projects which haven't been produced yet. Therefore I am rather pointing out that China has 15 054A already in service, and will have additional 3 in 2014, and additional 2 in 2015, total of 20. That is something we can be sure off, compared to Russians who are talking about lets say Admiral Gorskhov frigate which still does NOT have one single frigate operational.
> 
> 2 Gorskhov frigates is being built as we speak, and is expected to be ready in 2015, LOL. 1 Grema-whatever class corvette is expected to be ready in 2015.
> 
> So to sum this up. 2 Gorskhov frigate and 1 Grema-corvette in 2015 will be ready VERSUS 20 Type 054A frigates, 6 Type 054C destroyers, and at least 4 Type 052D destroyers.
> 
> You still wanna do the numbers which ships are better, not to mention who has more of them 2013-2014-2015 timeline ?
> 
> Russia has planned up to 20 Gorskhov frigates. Do you seriously think Russia will be able to build that by 2020, when you look at the fact that 1st and 2nd frigate will be ready in 2014?
> 
> Here is your socalled "state-of-the-art" frigate; according once again to Russian sources, it wil WAY TO EXPENCIVE.
> 
> State-of-the-art frigates too expensive for Russia - English pravda.ru
> 
> What has Russia done to compensate for SLOW and EXPENCIVE building? Russia has gone to Admiral Grigorovich-class frigate which is LIGHTER than Gorskhov-class frigate. That means Russia is going BACK on building ships, while PLANs ships are getting stealthier, bigger, more armed and advances and more in numbers.
> 
> So by 2015, Russias fleet of new ships will be 3 Grigorovich-class frigates (3850 ton), 2 Gorkhov frigates (4500 ton) and 1 Grema-whatever class corvette (2200 ton)
> 
> VERSUS
> 
> 20 Type 054A frigates (4300 ton), 6 Type 052C destroyers (7000 ton), at least 4 052D destroyers (7500-7800 ton)
> 
> And you are sitting here and telling us that "Russian ships are soooooo amazing" and sooo much stealthier and sooooooo much better armed, LMAO.
> 
> So please keep whining about how "useless" Type 056 corvette is, while we are building 054A, soon 054B and 052C and 052D destroyers. I am sure you were laughing when we produced 84 Type 022 missile boats which pack 8 anti-ship missiles each, total of 672 anti-ship missiles on those 84 stealth missile boats. However missile boats nor 056 corvettes are the back of our navy as we speak. It's 054A and soon 054B, 052C and 052D against your Supah Dupah Gorskhov and Grigorovich-class frigates that are not even operational, LOL.
> 
> 4) Yeah, Russia is building Improved Kilo-class for themselves because Russia doesn't have any! LOL. That's funny, because all Improved Kilo-class subs are after all exported to other countries.
> 
> I am not sure it helps the Russian Navy bragging about Improved Kilo-class SSK when they have 0 Improved Kilo-class subs and is sitting only with old Kilo-class subs with highly questionable combat readiness. China on the other hand has 12 Improved Kilo-class subs. India har only 5 Improved Kilo-class subs, and 5 standard Kilo-class subs.
> 
> Algeria which you called poor and showed your low intelligence, has 4 Improved Kilo-class subs now, and Vietnam which is poor will even have 6 of them by 2017.
> 
> It doesn't help much for the Russian Navy when they have 0 today, does it? LOL.
> 
> There is NO deal for Lada-class yet. If there is, it is going to be joint-project between Russia and China. Rumor about buying Su-35 has been on since 2008.
> 
> Once again, point is Russia itself failed to produce Lada-class by themselves, and China is NOT buying anything that Russia can't even produce for their customer. I really don't know where you head is, but it is definitely not on your shoulders.
> 
> J-10 was never in competition in Myanmar - however, China has sold older frigates to Myanmar which Myanmar wanted, and they got them. Now Thailand will most likely get a lot bigger and better frigates from China, where China will most likely win over the U.S. counterpart in Thailand.
> 
> So the only FAIL here, must be your lies which you present time and time, hoping no one will call you out, while you are calling others for idiot. I will refrain from calling you that, since I can't stop laughing here, and it is highly questionable why I even am replying to you. It's more to show everyone how you lie - people might start believing your fantasies, but I don't have much time to waste either way, so this is my last reply to your lies and name calling.
> 
> 6) Once again, imaginary stuff just as LMFS. Russia "stating". I think I have already produced more than enough evidence, when Russia is "stating something" it always comes out very late, more expencive than planned and in small numbers.
> 
> The same thing about "wonderful" T-50 that will be owned by the majority of other countries, and not by Russia itself. 200 for Russia, and more than 750-800 for other countries, LOL.
> 
> Just as you stated that T-50 will be ready in 2015, back in 2010. Now it's in 2016, and many are saying 2017.
> 
> Just as you stated that India will buy 200 of these, now it's 144.
> 
> Just as Russian sources stated that China will buy up to 100 T-50 only months before J-20 and J-31 were revealed. Now China will buy ZERO T-50.
> 
> Now, once again, Russia is "stating" that this MBT will be ready in 2015 and that 2300 units will be produced by 2020, which is total BS. Russia is claiming faster production rate than the U.S. in another words, for a product that is supposed to be even better than M1A2 Abrams. Don't make me laugh, seriously.
> 
> Russia might produce Armata in 2015. But the numbers Russia is operating with should be adjusted, such as taking a number 0 away of the original number. I think 230 units might be more realistic, and not 2300.
> 
> So far everyone know that you are bragging about wonderful Russian weapons such as:
> 
> 1) T-90 MBT
> 2) Improved Kilo-class SSK
> 3) Su-30
> 4) Su-35
> 5) T-50
> 
> Yet, number 1, 2, 3 and 4 on my list is owned in majority by other countries, while there are very few T-90 in Russian Armed Forces, ZERO Improved Kilo-class subs, no more than 6 or 10 Su-30 and barely introducing Su-35 which you clearly alongside T-50 also plan selling majority of total production numbers to other countries.
> 
> I am sure in a case of conflict, it counts a lot for Russian Armed Forces knowing that while other countries have T-90, Improved Kilo-class subs, Su-30 and soon Su-35, the Russians would have to fight today with old Kilo-class SSK, majority of their tanks being old T-72, 200 of their 291 MiG-29 CAN'T even fly and who knows how many of those Su-27 can fly too.
> 
> While Russia is towards modernization throughout 2025 and having all these plans on the paper, China is already ahead, and you also think China will sit still from 2013-2025, right?  Right, LOL.
> 
> I wish you luck with your 2 Gorskhov class frigates in 2015, alongside 3 Grigorovich and 1 Supah Dupah Gre-whatever class corvette.
> And we will have fun having our 20 Type 054A frigates, 6 Type 052C and 4 Type 052D by 2015, alongside not only 12 Improved Kilo-class subs but also 14-15 Song-class SSK and 8 + Yuan/Improved Yuan class SSK, total of more than 34-35 SSK.



2]Again typical chinese mentality of quantity over quality,the discussion is about tech not numbers.And in technology the stereguschy corvettes are far better than ANYTHING china has to offer in that range of corvette/light frigate.
3]Again same story,counting numbers of inferior ships.Numbers are lesser due to recovering russain economy not chinese super technology.Tech and weaponry of gorshkov class is FAR superior to chinese frigates lol.
4]Same numbers game,kilo is russian weaponry it can have any amount it wants when it wants?What does it have to do with china?Useless chinese tech can't build a diesel submarine better than kilo bragging about being superior tech,negotiating for lada reject.Several chinese sources reported this.Whatever only proves my point that china has no comparable tech to kilo or lada.
5]J-10 was in trials in myanmar,just because it failed now chinese fanboys trying to cover up.It was reported all over the net.Heck even ur best buddy PAF rejected J-10 in its current form coz it doesn't meet standards and waiting for better versions.Contract was signed in 2006 for 36 j-10 but due to poor quality even soft loan j-10 not acceptable to PAF.
6]Again noob putting comments in my mouth i said nothing of those.T-50 IS MILES ahead of j-20 which poor mans' mig-1.44 copy,canards for vastly reduced stealth,an aircraft that won't even supercruise or TVC without begging to russia for better engines.2300 units will be produced,not by 2020.Chinese fascination with numbers is very amusing.You know u got crap quality,so harping on about quantity in a tech discussion.
ARMATA is light years ahead of poor design ztz-99 as proved with diagrams in earlier posts.
It doesn't matter to me if china sits still or not because china vs russia war is not my problem,but china and russian tech IS,because india uses russian tech so that affects us directly and its conclusively proved that russian tech is WAAAY ahead of chinese crap.Get that through ur head 5 footer.


----------



## PRC2025

AUSTERLITZ said:


> 2]Again typical chinese mentality of quantity over quality,the discussion is about tech not numbers.And in technology the stereguschy corvettes are far better than ANYTHING china has to offer
> 3]Again same story,counting numbers of inferior ships..Tech and weaponry of gorshkov class is FAR superior to chinese frigates lol.
> 4]Same numbers game,kilo is russian weaponry it can have any amount it wants when it wants?
> 
> 5]J-10 was in trials in myanmar,just because it failed now chinese fanboys trying to cover up.It was reported all over the net.Heck even ur best buddy PAF rejected J-10 in its current form coz it doesn't meet standards and waiting for better versions.Contract was signed in 2006 for 36 j-10 but due to poor quality even soft loan j-10 not acceptable to PAF.
> 
> 6]Again noob putting comments in my mouth i said nothing of those.T-50 IS MILES ahead of j-20 which poor mans' mig-1.44 engines.2300 units will be produced,not by 2020.Chinese fascination with numbers .
> ARMATA is light years ahead of poor design ztz-99 as proved with diagrams in earlier posts.
> its conclusively proved that russian tech is WAAAY ahead of chinese crap.Get that through ur head 5 footer.



Once again, you could not answer normally, but start calling not only me but all Chinese more or less indirectly for stupid. This is funny, because I continue laughing. Someone who is so aggressive, means have serious problems by arguing for what you are defending.

1) No, the "typical" PLA mentality today is BOTH number AND tech. For Russian Armed Forces on the other hand, it seems to be all about how many units they can sell to OTHER countries while RuAF and RuNavy are sitting with old c-r-a-p.

So Stere-whatever class 1800 ton corvette is superior to everything China has? LOL. I don't find this even worth replying too. This is truly a waste of time.

2) Oh really, so 1 Gorskhov class frigate which will be ready in the beginning of 2014, and 2nd one during 2015, you say Gorskhov is better than Type 052C or Type 052D destroyer? Funny boy!!! 

Second of all, yes, numbers and tech count. When you understand that having 30 Gorskhovs or 30 Type 052C and D is a lot better than having only 2, then we can discuss further. 

Newest info now is that Russia has reduced the number of Gorskhovs to 6 by 2020, and total number of 20 according to Russia can only be achieved by next 20 years, around 2032, yaaaayyy! lol.

3) Yes, Improved Kilo-class SSK is Russian weaponry and Russia has 0 of them, PLAN has 12. PLAN has also Song-class SSK and even better Improved Yuan-class SSK.

This, 6 years ago - at least we have Improved Kilos, Song, Improved Yuan = total 34 SSK, Russia 0 Improved Kilo-class subs, only old standard Kilos where half of those 16 don't even work.

The uninvited guest: Chinese sub pops up in middle of U.S. Navy exercise, leaving military chiefs red-faced | Mail Online

4) Pakistan is struggling with it's economy, and there is no problem with J-10 at all. Pakistan would have picked J-10 if the price was close to JF-17. Furthermore JF-17 is something Pakistan is producing, while J-10 doesn't give Pakistan a production line.

Argentine is interested in JF-17 too and wants joint-production for JF-17.

Argentine officials confirm joint-production talks over China's FC-1 fighter - IHS Jane's 360

So once again I am LAUGHING, you are using Myanmar as "source", which has lower GDP PPP per capita than North Korea. They can't afford modern J-10.

You are also forgetting that China owns JF-17 equally as Pakistan does, yet China has NOT, and is NOT intending to introduce JF-17 in PLAAF. So you have NO logic at all, because if J-10 "sucked", China would have introduced JF-17 Block 2 in PLAAF LONG TIME AGO. 

5) Once again; while you are calling J-20 and J-31 for "poor mans" fighter, just as Algeria was "poor" according to you, lol, it's funny when an Indian who is defending Russia starts calling China and Algeria for "poor" where China and Algeria hold 3.400 billion and 190 billion USD respectivly. You are such a funny boy 

Those imaginary T-50 sales number just keep going down, don't they, lol.

6) Once again, Imaginary Armata is "light years ahead" according to an Indian. Wow, there we go, I am so "overwhelmed". LMAO.

So you are saying that 2300 will NOT be produced by 2020?

Why does Russian sources say that 2300 WILL be produced by 2020? Because they are deluded, as always. Everything Russia has said for the past 10-15 years was always LATE, more expencive and in MUCH LESS numbers than originally planned.

Read here:

Minister Alexander Sukhorukov says 2300 BY 2020

Russia Plans to Field the T-99, a Radically New Main Battle Tank by 2015 - Defense Update - Military Technology & Defense News

I think he had a little too much vodka when he did this interview. 2300 units from 2015 to 2020, LOL. WHATEVER. Have fun boy, while you are waiting for Gorskhov and Grigorijevich class frigates towards 2020 and beyond we are building 052D destroyers and soon 052B frigates in addition to 10.000 + ton 055 heavy destroyer.

Now, I am a 5 footer? Such a little racist funny boy, aren't you

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Again get it through ur head i have no interest in comparison between russian and chinese armed forces,chinese have more money obviously they will have more numbers.
The discussion emerged due to contention of some chinese members that chinese tech was superior to russian which is patently false.Tech matters to me beacuse we extensively use russian tech and will continue to do so.

As for jf-17 argument,it only means jf-17 is not on par with latest modern fighters which is true.
U keep counting nmbers..nowhere u have compared tech...

U have no frigate comparable to gorshkov,no corvtette to stereguschy,forget the now being modernized 3 kirov class battlecruisers.
I showed u before how useless ztz-99 turret design is.You are comparing it to new generation armata with unmanned turret,bustle autoloader,new gen ERA,new gun,new APFSDS lol.
So keep playing ur number fetish..in tech u have nothing on the russians.


----------



## PRC2025

AUSTERLITZ said:


> Again get it through ur head i have no interest in comparison between russian and chinese armed forces,chinese have more money obviously they will have more numbers.
> discussion emerged due to contention of some chinese members that chinese tech was superior to russian which is patently false.
> 
> As for jf-17 argument,it only means jf-17 is not on par with latest modern fighters which is true.
> U keep counting nmbers..
> 
> U have no frigate comparable to gorshkov,no corvtette to stereguschy,forget the now being modernized 3 kirov class battlecruisers.
> I showed u before how useless ztz-99 turret design is.
> So keep playing ur number fetish..in tech u have nothing on the russians.



1) Chinese tech in ships IS superior OR better if you will to Gorskhov and your Stera-whatever class frigate. This is a fact, and PLAN is definitely NOT scared of any 1800 ton corvette nor is it scared of your 4000-4500 ton frigate which you will have 1 by 2014 or 2 by 2015 or now according to newest numbers, 6 by 2020. 

Once again, we have 054A frigates, soon 20 of them, soon 6 O52C destroyers way more potent than your 1-2 Gorskhov class frigate, not to mention 2 052D destroyers which we will have ready within months, as we speak. We will produce 2 052D destroyers by the time your 1st Gorskhov-class frigate is ready. 

2) Numbers DO count. There is possible to have TWO thoughts in your mind at the same time. One thought is technology, and the other one is numbers, and production output.

Let me once again refer to the U.S. The U.S. has very good Arleigh Burke DDGs, but what other things does U.S. have? Do they have 2 or 4 Arleigh Burke? Nooooo, they don't! They have 62 Arleigh Burke DDG! And building another 3 or 4 !

Do you understand the numbers between lets say 4 DDG and 65 DDG? LOL. 

So when 200 Russian T-50s meet 2,443 U.S. F-35 and 187 F-22A, that's gonna be a LOT of fun, and NOT so fun for the Russian pilots.

So you need to understand in your head, that no matter how good Russian and Chinese tech is, Russia and China must be able to produce in big numbers also. Clearly, Russia is NOT able to do so.
The U.S. plan to lead you with 12 to 1. That's BRUTAL. BRUTAL is the word. If you count F-22A that's 13 to 1.

So China is more than enough sure that J-20 and J-31 will be comparable to F-22 and F-35, but China plans also to build a LOT of these planes, or else, there is no point in making 200 of them only, like Russia is planning or like India is planning to buy only 144.

China has to build at least 1.000, preferably more. So yeah, number are extremely important along the tech.

The same goes for lets say aircraft carriers. No matter how good Nimitz-class is, what makes them great is their capacity to load many aircraft on board. Which means, that firepower of 1 or 2 Nimitz-class carriers is NOT the same as having 10, which the U.S. does. So the U.S. would have been considerably WEAKER no matter how good tech they have IF the U.S. didn't had 10 carriers with them.

And the numbers are 62 AB DDG, 10 Nimitz carriers, and close to 40 SSN subs. Not to mention the fact that they have 3000 fighters, and plan on replacing them with 2,443 F-35, which is once again, when F-22A is added, 13 times HIGHER compared to what Russian is planning to have in their service.

So you need to understand soon enough that 3-4 Gorskhov will NEVER make Russian Navy strong, but 50 Gorskhovs will. And Russia does NOT have money nor the capacity to build 50 of them. The capacity is 6 of those frigates by 2020.

The same goes for MBT. You can have as good Armata as you want, U.S. can bomb them from the air, and if that's not enough, Armata is gonna meet 8,000 Abrams. So you see, we Chinese understand that both tech and the numbers are very important, just as the U.S. understand the same.

Everybody understands here that the U.S. military strenght would not have been close to what they have if the U.S. had lets say 2 Nimitz only with 10 Arleigh Burke class destroyers and 400-500 fighters only.

But since you are defending Russia, then I must educate you on the facts, which are clearly well-documented by myself already, regarding the tech, and I really don't see any point in discussing once again, why 054A, 052C and 052D is better than your 1800 ton to 4000 ton ships, which are both smaller, less armed and less in numbers compared to the number of stealthy ships PLAN has.

The UK, France and Germany have higher tech in several areas compared to China and Russia, but still, they don't have the power that Russia and China have in the world, because UK and France are in a massive debt and in recession, and if that French Navy carrier with 20 Rafales on bord even came close to 500 KM off the coast of China trying something hostile, then that French carrier along with it's support ships would have been dead ship pretty fast, and those 20 Rafale planes would have to taste some salty water.
UK doesn't even have carriers. 

So despite UK and French tech, they still had to have help from the U.S. bombing Libya, and the UK and France were bombing for 7 straight months, before they were able to destroy a tiny country that didn't had anything to begin with anyway.

And Germany is not interested in any war at all, they just wanna sell stuff,  However they know that despite their tech, they cannot be a global player. And the point here is to be a global player.

There are certain things that has to be in place in other to be a global player. 

3) Since you are an Indian, I understand that using Russian tech is very important to you, and I could not care less about that, I am just stopping your misinformation and lies, because someone has to. As you can see, even Russians on this thread can see I that I am after all using Russian sources, which you are still DENYING.I think that's a shame.

4) Furthermore, once again regarding MiG-29, you need to fix yours not falling from the skies, and Russia need to fix their 200 MiG-29, so they can start flying.
IF J-10 wasn't good enough for PLAAF, we wouldn't have produced more than 220 of them. Russia has NEVER denied China MiG-29; China was simply never interested in that plane.

Russians have offered us Su-30MKK/MK2, which we have bought around 10 years ago and now they want us to buy their Su-35. Russians have even calculated in a wrong way, that China will buy 100 T-50, which is simply not true.

So the point, once again is - if China wanted MiG-29 instead of J-10, China could have got MiG-29 long time ago. As we already know, not even Algeria wanted 36 MiG-29SMT, so they were returned.

5) I seriously don't care what you think about T-99 MBT, while you keep dreaming that Russia will produce 2300 Armata MBT by 2020, which is simply laughable. I have done my part proving how deluded Russian sources are regarding the numbers they are planning; even you know they simply cannot produce 2300 by 2020. And I will definitely be watching this "project" so I can start laughing around 2014 and 2015, when another set of reports and delay and reduced numbers starts popping up, just as it did with Gorskhov, down from 20 to 15 and now down to 6 by 2020, where the number of 20 can only be achieved by 2030 or so.

And finally; 3 Kirov-class; that's the best you got? Ships from 1980s. We were talking about stealth here, and you are so desperate and knowing you don't have any argument that you had to drag in 3 Kirov-ships.

Fine, let's roll. Now we are going into "imaginary" stuff, since we are talking 5 years ahead.

Only 1 Kirov is operational, and Petar Veliky will have to go to dry dock soon to be fixed and upgraded, that will take a lot of time.

So Russia has announced that 2nd Kirov-class has to be upgraded too. You know how LONG that will take? 5 years ! That's right, 2nd Kirov-class cruiser will be ready for service in 2018 ! Do I have to start now telling you how many 052D Destroyers or even better Type 055 heavy destroyers China plan to build by 2018 ?

There are truly some nice rusty pics of this Kirov that will be ready in 2018, out there on the internet. It looks totally "stealthy and modern"

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Numbers don't count for anything in a discussion regarding technology and ur type 054 friagets are no match for gorshkov,nor do u have anything close to the new modernized 3 kirov class battlecruisers.
The only reason russian numbers are low atm is because of recovering economy,they are nwo picking up and will ahve 30 not 4 eventually no matter u like it or not.
FOR THE LAST TIME IF U WANT TO BRAG ABOUT RUSSIAN NUMBERS TAKE IT UP WITH RUSSIAN MEMBERS,I AM ONLY TALKING ABOUT LEVEL OF TECHNOLOGY BECAUSE THAT IS RELEVANT TO ME AN INDIAN MEMBER,SINCE WE USE RUSSIAN TECH A LOT.
Russia don't need to fix mig-29s,they are buying su-35bms,mig-35s,su-30sm,su-34 and soon pak fa.Also upgrading mig-31.And again u are taking it to russian armed forces not russian tech.
I don't know where u got idea russia will sell 100 t-50 to china.Lol.Indian participation in program and funding guarantess that will never happen.
U can live in your dreamland and make lots of long irrelevant posts on numbers fact is u have not posted a single example in that very long post[which is getting irritating to reply too repeatedly] where chinese technology is superior to russian.

Topol-M-Nope
Iskander-Nope
S-400-nope
Yasen-Nope
Borei-Nope
Diesel subs-Nope
Strategic bomber tu-160- nope
Surface ships kirov class- nope
Tanks-ztz-99 flawed tank..give me a break
MBRL-Nice smerch copies
Fighters-j-10 vs mig-35,j-11[copy] vs su-35?J-20[engineless mig1.44 copy] vs t-50?Give me a break
Helicopters-Mi-28n havoc/ka-52 vs wz-10[gunship designed by kamov under contract] lol.

So shut ur trap once and for all and open it once u actually start producing high end stuff that don't depend on russian subsystems or based on russian design.


----------



## PRC2025

AUSTERLITZ said:


> ur type 054 friagets are no match for gorshkov,nor do u have anything close to the new modernized 3 kirov class
> The only reason russian numbers are low atm is because of recovering economy,they are nwo picking
> WE USE RUSSIAN TECH A LOT.
> Russia don't need to fix mig-29s,they are buying su-35bms,mig-35s,su-30sm,su-34 and soon pak fa.Also upgrading mig-31
> I don't know where u got idea russia will sell 100 t-50 to china.Lol.Indian participation in program and funding guarantess that will never happen.
> ]





A lot of useless comments from you, as always.

Key points once again, to prove against your c-r-a-p spewing:

1) No match for Gorskhov ? Lol. Funny boy at it again, along with 3 Kirov cruisers. I LIKE how you started to "use" Kirovs in the discussion, that says A LOT, and I am laughing because of that. 

Russia has 1 Kirov, and as I documented, 2nd Kirov will be ready in 2018. No one cares about rusty Kirov shells; what counts is how many are working NOW. That would be 1. The number will be 2, in 2018. FACT. Old ships, NOT stealthy. You were talking about stealth, yet you drag in Kirovs from 1980s into the discussion.

Have you seen me talk about upgraded Sovremmenny-class China has? No, because, they are today more or less useless against modern ships, and we are facing Japanese and U.S. fleets, and not your simple and only Kirov cruiser. Guess what, we have 4 Sovremmenies, and I don't even count them among modern ships PLAN has. Neither should the Russian Navy for that matter.

So what you have is 1 Kirov, and imaginary 2nd Kirov that will be ready in 2018. 

2) The reason Russian numbers are LOW, is because their whole industrial complex has suffered for the past 22 years - therefore Russia needs to fix the whole building and industrial complex which has been in ruins since 1991-1992. 

There is a reason why Russian Navy is desperately clinging to Kirov which is from Soviet times, because Russia is NOT able to even build 4500 ton frigate at a normal speed. 
As some of Russian people has pointed out, it's between either 2 corvettes/frigates or to upgrade 2nd Kirov, which takes 5 years. Russia went for upgrading 2nd Kirov because they can't produce fast enough or big enough ships as the Russian Navy needs.

Second of all, Kirov was supposed to be the lead ship of a carrier group, and Russia is not going to have several carriers for a very long time. Kutznezov has to go to dry dock, and be upgraded. The Russian carrier is already in BAD condition. Redeploying it to The Medditeranian just because of the Syrian crisis, will take another toll at this carrier. Soon it has to be scrapped.

*Quote:*

The carrier returned to its home base in Severomorsk on February 17 2012 and was scheduled to enter a four year mid-life upgrade by year&#8217;s end.

*Admiral Kuznetsov was scheduled for a relaunch in 2017. Pushing back the refit seems to be a blow to the Navy, as the &#8216;Kuznetzov&#8217; is already considered a &#8216;goulag&#8217; for seamen, due to appalling living conditions on board.*

Russian Aircraft Carrier To Redeploy to the Mediterranean | Israel

Kirov is supposed to protect this aircraft carrier that is about to fall apart over the next couple of years. Soon, there is nothing to protect for that single Kirov, that has to go to dry dock too very soon.

3) Yes, India uses Russian tech A LOT.

Like where you have lost over HALF of all your Russian planes over past 40 years.

Quote:

*The Rajya Sabha was informed that over the past 40 years, India had lost more than half of its MiG combat fleet of 872 aircraft. The minister disclosed that &#8220;482 MiG aircraft accidents took place till April 19, 2012&#8243;*

Indian Air Force lost half of MiG fighter jets in deadly crashes | Indian Military News


Lets see how many you have lost for the past 3 years - that would be 29 fighters, actually 30, since you lost MiG-29 few days ago.

IAF lost 29 fighter planes in past 3 years: Minister | Indian Military News

4) So Russia doesn't need to fix MiG-29, yet you are telling us that MiG-29 is better than J-10, yet I have proved that China NEVER wanted MiG-29, it has BAD combat history, in every conflict, and when there is no conflict, they either can't fly or they keep falling from the skies.

Russia has been agressivly marketing MiG-35, yet no one wants it. So Russia decided to order a few for RuAF. We will see how that goes.

Clearly RuAF does not appreciate Su-30, Su-35 or T-50 for that matter since they keep selling majority of them to OTHER COUNTRIES. Who are the BIGGEST customers of the planes? NOT China for sure! If we wanted more than those Su-30MKK/MK2 we would have ordered more of them. China has own Flanker family, as well-documented.

Once again, you are not reading, I have already provided Russian source for where there is an indication that Russia expected back in 2010 to sell upto 100 T-50 to China.

Quote - news from 2010 before J-20 and J-31 were revealed

*China (up to 100 units in the years 2025-2035)*

Russia to export 600 Sukhoi PAK FA fifth generation jets - English pravda.ru

China didn't wanted to fund T-50, China was asked to do so. And you can't hinder Russia in regards to who Russia wants to sell their T-50s to.
India will get their own T-50 from Russia will special requirements, which has been reduced to 144 on October 16th 2012.

Quote:

*India will now order just 144 of the fighters, all single-seat models, Browne said, down from an originally-intended batch of around 200, including 48 two-seaters.*

http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/143727/india-to-cut-stealth-fighter-order-by-third.html

This is a net miscalculation on behalf of Russia since 2010, which now accounts for 100 imaginary T-50 to China and 56 less T-50 for India - total of 156 T-50 less than calculated in 2010.

Regarding S-400, it is also called S-300PMU3, which is basically nothing new, but a another upgrade from S-300PMU2. China was the first customer of S-300PMU2 back in "the days", and according to Jane's, China might have funded S-400 project. Either way, because of rumored partly-funding, China is expected to become first customer of S-400.

China may become first importer of Russian S-400 missile systems - official - Interfax

The rest of your reply, is also useless, and already replied too. I have no intention to lose more time on your aggressive and pointless replies which are full of personal attacks. I think it is a lot more productive to rather report your replies since they are either a spam or full of personal attacks.

As I already told you, I wish Russia and even India good luck on their projects and it is not Russian or Indian frigates and subs China is facing. We are facing a lot more potent ships and subs than that.

Russian ships will in majority be facing NATO-pact forces, and therefore 3 out of 4 Russian fleets (Northern, Baltic and Black Sea) are geared towards NATO countries. Pacific Fleet is geared towards northern Japan. So don't you worry, I have nothing against Russian ships, I wanted only to prove how much lies you are coming with, reply after reply. And I have countered all your lies.

As also pointed out, wishing good luck to Indian ships; after all, you will be eating up U.S. influence in Gulf region; it is not Chinese influence that is suffering there. Because of your build-up which is clearly geared towards domination and not only fighting Pakistan, this will not only alarm the U.S., but also Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, not to mention Gulf states that won't accept their influence there being reduced because of the Indian fleets, even though they are still occupied with Iran, you should be glad they are, or else they would soon have put full force being supporting Pakistan against India.

Either way, this doesn't concern China much, and therefore when I reply in regards to Russian or Indian ships, I have NO "bias" against them; you on the other hand, can't comment normally at all. I even comment balanced regarding U.S. ships. 
Anyway, I am not interested in discussing anymore with people who are spamming and calling others for racist names.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

PLz just see the firepower of the kirov class and compare it with ur ships..i was giving example of kirov class only as a comparison with big ships.U calling kirovs old,just check its air defence is same as ur air defence destroyers[based on s-300 series] and has huge number of them,stealth-really u expect a ship as big as that to be stealthy?Show me one ship in the world in that size that is stealthy....after modernization with newer weapons .. no comparison.
In smaller ships just compare with ur type 56 type 54 vs sereguschy/grimasyscy and gorshkov classes.World of difference.U guys don't even have a credible naval air defence on ur smaller ships.puny small range useless sams.
Calling sovremenny obsolete is another piece of crap,these upgarded sovremeny are among the biggest PLAN surface threats with their sunburn missiles.These sunburn missiles along with the klub sizzlers on the kilos are the real threats to us carrier battle groups not propaganda df-21.

Yes russian military industrial complex has suffered,but that has done more damage to their manufacturing capacity rather than technology which world class still and has got great advantage now due to free market and access to european/western civil electronics.
Its not that rusian air force doesn't appreciate its planes,its that it doesn't have enough funds or manufacturing ability to mass them as much as it would like to.Again numbers manufacturing don't matter to me,only technology level and u still haven't given any examples of superior chinese tech?

Yes we use lot of russian planes and we have lost a lot of them-
Because-Bulk of migs are over 40 yr old airframes which have exhausted their flying hrs but IAF refuses to lower flying hours and still flies minimum 180-200 hrs a yr with them.Compared to poor chinese flying hrs our pilots do routine 220-230 hr a yr and mki pilots 250+.
IAF stated policy is ,to quote a former air chief-
''I would rather lose pilots in peace than in war''-and so we do,but make no compromise on pilot quality..old airframes or not.

Mig-29 with TVC and AESA is certainly better than j-10.That is mig-35 version.Otherwise mostly equal,except j-10 still has engine issues,which makes mig-29 more attractive to customers.

China didn't fund t-50 because it was revealed to have its own 5th gen program thats why.
What has kuznetsov's living conditions to do with technology?Everyone knows russian training levels have fallen since soviet times.
Actually kirov isn't supposed to protect anything,its supposed to lead its own battlegroups,and the 2 new russian carriers now on drawing board.Russia wants to have one carrier for each fleet.

S-400 uses newer interceptor missiles with completely different performance parameters,to say its s-300 s laughable.
Also thats a propaganda report,russia has already declared it won't s-400 for a few years,after that they may give u downgraded version.Still that would only prove my point..u still buying russian tech coz its superior.

You didn't show me any examples of chinese tech superiority over russians in any of your lengthy posts..so i mostly considered ur posts useless as well.
I wish china and russia as well.Russia is old freind and as long as chinese navy doesn't interfere in IOR it will be nice to have popcorn and watch sino-US naval race in SCS.Our buildup is not geared towards domination but deterrence against chinese intrusion into our backyard.I do comment balanced usually,sometimes i use unnecessary adjectives in heated discussion so apologies for that.


----------



## ptldM3

PRC2025 said:


> A lot of useless comments from you, as always.
> 
> 
> 
> 3) Yes, India uses Russian tech A LOT.
> 
> Like where you have lost over HALF of all your Russian planes over past 40 years.



Cheap comment on your behalf, but that is nothing new, all you have been doing is insulting and deviating from one topic to the next. upon losing an argument or running out of things to say you change the subject by purposefully and immaturely mentioning such topics as economy, from there you talk about Georgia, the F-35, Indian crashes, reforms, ect, ect. Next we can expect Mickey mouse and dragons since you have brought up every other random and bizarre topic.



PRC2025 said:


> Quote:
> 
> *The Rajya Sabha was informed that over the past 40 years, India had lost more than half of its MiG combat fleet of 872 aircraft. The minister disclosed that &#8220;482 MiG aircraft accidents took place till April 19, 2012&#8243;*




Do you have any idea of the attrition rate older aircraft? Even the F-16 has had 20 crashes in one year, at it's peak. Although you tried to make an insult you only revealed how ignorant and immature you are in the subject. 

Link: http://www.afsec.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-080114-063.pdf


from a 2012 report at least *317* F-16s have crashed and *351* have been involved in class A accidents. More F-16 crashes occurred during the 1980s then any other decade because those were the earlier variants which are not as mature as today's F-16s. Even in the past decade F-16s crash at a rate of anywhere from 3-10+. 

So the fact that an aircraft that is over 60 years old is crashing is not a surprise especially when you take into account *years of operation, and hours flown.* Furthermore, not all crashes are do to mechanical faults which is what you are implying. Crashes can occur from following reasons:

Pilot error- examples fuel starvation, altitude misjudgment.

Improper maintenance- example improper installation of overhauled components.

Bird strikes.

Pilot blackouts- Pilots passing out in high G maneuvers.

Poor wheather- example heavy fog.

Neglected maintenance- example, maintenance overhauls are extended beyond safe intervals.






PRC2025 said:


> Lets see how many you have lost for the past 3 years - that would be 29 fighters, actually 30, since you lost MiG-29 few days ago.





As proven crashes happen. The Chinese air force also have many documented crashes, the difference is that it is only publicly know because someone takes pictures or captures the crash on video, considering China has a large air force that has been operation for decades, you can bet that there has been hundreds of Chinese aircraft that have crashed.






PRC2025 said:


> 4) So Russia doesn't need to fix MiG-29, yet you are telling us that MiG-29 is better than J-10,






What is there to fix? Russia is ordering new Mig-29s, as far as design goes there is nothing wrong with the aircraft, since there are spares reports of crashes involving the Mig-29 over many decades.

And yes the Mig-29 is better then the J-10 in almost every measurable way, this is not even taking into account avionics systems.




PRC2025 said:


> yet I have proved that China NEVER wanted MiG-29, it has BAD combat history,




Show us the kills of those amazing Chinese aircraft. A handful of Mig-29s have been shot down, some of which didn't even have functioning radars, this is hardly a fair comparison or an un-bias way to evaluate the aircrafts performance especially since Iraqi pilots have been so bad that they have been documented crashing themselves into the ground while in combat.




PRC2025 said:


> in every conflict, and when there is no conflict, they either can't fly or they *keep falling from the skies.*




Clearly another cheap shot. A handful of crashes means nothing. As if we don't have reports of J-10s crashing, or videos and reports of other Chinese aircraft crashing.







PRC2025 said:


> *Clearly RuAF does not appreciate Su-30, Su-35 or T-50 for that matter since they keep selling majority of them to OTHER COUNTRIES*. Who are the BIGGEST customers of the planes? NOT China for sure! If we wanted more than those Su-30MKK/MK2 we would have ordered more of them. China has own Flanker family, as well-documented.




Firstly, how does Russia sell the majority of SU-35s and T-50s to other countries when only Russia operates the SU-35 and the T-50 is a prototype? Furthermore, Russia sells more aircraft obroad then it operates because there is a demand for Russian aircraft, the same can not be said for Chinese aircraft. Russia also keep increasing SU-30 orders, as well as orders for other aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Major Shaitan Singh

China will actually purchase 100 instead of 24 Su-35 advanced fighters from Russia, as put down in the new contract signed during the Paris Air Show 2013, according to the Moscow-based state radio broadcaster the Voice of Russia.

About 49 Russian aviation companies, including Sukhoi, Mikoyan, Ilyushin, Antonov and Rosoboronexport, attended the Paris Air Show held between Jun 17 and 23 at Le Bourget in the French capital. To celebrate the 50th anniversary of the air show, a Su-35S fighter flew its first demonstration flight outside Russia. Described as a 4.5 generation fighter, the Su-35S treated the visitors to a display of some impressive aerobatics during the first day of the air show on June 17.

The acrobatics was designed by Sukhoi to attract attention from potential buyers, China certainly among one of them. A deal was made on Nov 2012 when Russia agreed to provide China 24 Su-35 fighters with the advanced AL-31 engine. "Upcoming supplies of the Su-35 fighters to China are 'an open secret'," said a Russian official to the Voice of Russia.

"A decision to supply the Su-35 fighters to China was made long ago," added the official. "The parties are working hard to coordinate the financial and technical conditions of the future contract, which is due by the year's end. At present, the details of the contract are being specified." With the ability to detect air targets at a distance of over 400 kilometers and a combat radius of 1,600km, the Su-35 will dominate the Asia-Pacific sky until Japan and India receive their first fifth generation fighters by 2020, said the broadcaster.

China's Su-35 fighter order reaches 100


----------



## xuxu1457

Who knows the real number? Even 100 cost 6.5billion only 5% of China's one year defence budget, not a big deal

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## baajey

chinese can do a favor to US, buy all their F-22s


----------



## Abingdonboy

I'll believe it when I see it.


----------



## Fsjal

Just making Russia happy that a nation buys their planes. Anyway, China is just gonna buy 24. (maybe)


----------



## scherz

Is it wartime or why china suddenly need such a high amount of advenced fighters?...


----------



## Beerbal

> China will actually purchase* 100 instead of 24 Su-35* advanced fighters from Russia, as put down in the new contract signed during the Paris Air Show 2013, according to the Moscow-based state radio broadcaster the Voice of Russia.





You fool me once, You are cunning. You fool me twice I am chu** (Dumb/Fool/a$$hole)...


The J-11 was finally born in 1995 as a Chinese version of the Soviet-designed Sukhoi Su-27SK air superiority fighter after China secured a $2.5 billion production agreement which licensed *China to build 200 Su-27SK* aircraft using Russian-supplied kits. Under the terms of the agreement, these aircraft would be outfitted with Russian avionics, radars and engines. However, in 2004, Russian media reported that Shenyang co-production of the basic J-11 was* halted after around 100 examples were built*. The PLAAF later revealed a mock-up of an upgraded multi-role version of the J-11 in mid-2002.



History will repeat itself, China will copy the Su35BM and aftr making 50 Su35, they will come with J11XXX ..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## walle990

If this was the 90s China will take delivery of a portion, learn it and decline the rest. But now days China has a lot of cash, su35 will be directly useful and contribute positively towards the chinese aviation industry as a whole.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 帅的一匹

If Indian buys 126 Rafael, why we can't buy 100 SU35? It doesnt cost that much.


----------



## Beerbal

wanglaokan said:


> If Indian buys 126 Rafael, why we can't buy 100 SU35? It doesnt cost that much.






Our Need was omnirole medium class fighter, not heavy class airsuperiority fighter


----------



## rockstarIN

IF J-11 is up to the mark, why are they buying Su-35? I believe Su-35 does not have AESA.


----------



## 帅的一匹

Su35 will be deployed mainly at our east border to deal with Japan and USA.


----------



## 帅的一匹

rockstar said:


> IF J-11 is up to the mark, why are they buying Su-35? I believe Su-35 does not have AESA.


Don't tell me you feel alright when PLAAF running 100 SU35.

SU35 is the second best fighter next to F22 without any doubt, you can't deny one just like that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rockstarIN

wanglaokan said:


> Don't tell me you feel alright when PLAAF running 100 SU35.
> 
> SU35 is the second best fighter next to F22 without any doubt, you can't deny one just like that.



Since you are in AESA development, 5th Gen jet development besides J-10, it really surprises me for going for a non-aesa fighter.


----------



## Navigator

Again this BS ?
As I earlier noted in another thread, Voice of Russia and other Russian news agencies didn't report anything like this, was reported only that negotiations are continuing in agreement contract

*100 Su-35 - it's total number of the fighters that Russia wants to export, not only in China but also in other countries.*

According Pogosyan, Russia is going to produce about 200 Su-35, 100 for itself and 100 for export to other countries.
The mighty Sukhoi Su-35 lancing through the Le Bourget sky this week is just the beginning of the type&#8217;s international exposure, according to Mikhail Pogosyan.The head of Sukhoi&#8216;s parent company, United Aircraft, is forecasting 200 sales of the type, split 50:50 between domestic and export. There are 48 currently on order so far by the Russian military and Pogosyan is eyeing 100 export sales, which should come from existing customers of Sukhoi or MiG jets. 
air-show.co/military-aviation-news/paris-pogosyan-sees-market-for-200-su-35s/


----------



## aliaselin

scherz said:


> Is it wartime or why china suddenly need such a high amount of advenced fighters?...



Of course it is.
In 4 years, the number of 3rd generation fighter of China will be over 1,000
Hope our Indian friends will like it


----------



## Beast

Its been talking for 6 years about buying Su-35, until now is still not signed. I wonder after another 10 years, will they still talk about Su-35 deal?

Complete nonsense.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

******* bad news for us.
Need 3D TVC,RCS reductions and MIRES AESA ASAP now on the super sukhoi upgrade to counter this beast.


----------



## Cat12345

The Chinese has their own Flanker building, why do they need a Russian made SU-35? China has their own Flanker series.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistanisage

Any increase in number of SU-35 deal should include Transfer of Technology so that most of the aircrafts can be built in China.


----------



## Brahmos_2

Beast said:


> Its been talking for 6 years about buying Su-35, until now is still not signed. I wonder after another 10 years, will they still talk about Su-35 deal?
> 
> Complete nonsense.



May be the Russians are afraid of your reverse engineering specialists


----------



## naumananjum

Why chine need these plains??
dont they have their own??


----------



## qwerrty

Navigator said:


> Again this BS ?
> As I earlier noted in another thread, Voice of Russia and other Russian news agencies didn't report anything like this, was reported only that negotiations are continuing in agreement contract
> 
> *100 Su-35 - it's total number of the fighters that Russia wants to export, not only in China but also in other countries.*
> 
> According Pogosyan, Russia is going to produce about 200 Su-35, 100 for itself and 100 for export to other countries.
> The mighty Sukhoi Su-35 lancing through the Le Bourget sky this week is just the beginning of the type&#8217;s international exposure, according to Mikhail Pogosyan.The head of Sukhoi&#8216;s parent company, United Aircraft, is forecasting 200 sales of the type, split 50:50 between domestic and export. There are 48 currently on order so far by the Russian military and Pogosyan is eyeing 100 export sales, which should come from existing customers of Sukhoi or MiG jets.
> air-show.co/military-aviation-news/paris-pogosyan-sees-market-for-200-su-35s/



this



.........


----------



## Tipu_Sultan

> Why chine need these plains??
> dont they have their own??



becoz they want to upgrade JF series....... its called innovation for chinese world knws it as

COPY ....... PASTE.........COPY


----------



## aliaselin

Cat12345 said:


> The Chinese has their own Flanker building, why do they need a Russian made SU-35? China has their own Flanker series.


China will be more focus on J-15 and J-16.
J-15 for 150 
J-16 > 200
this makes the production capacity of China is not sufficient


----------



## shuttler

It is a good augmentation to our airforce as a whole as our speed of production cannot catch up with our target

Check the equivalent no of planes of our enemy and its proxies then you'll know the purchase is a good choice for strengthening our airpower. 

Forget about the "cut and paste" trolls if you can cut and paste why you still cant have a damn plane to fly after half a century of development?

We have our own independent and advancing science and tech to back us up for our aviation industry. We are closing the gap.


----------



## Zabaniyah

Another Su-35 thread?


----------



## vostok

I did not met such news in Russian internet segment.


----------



## Johny D

guess China has lost confidence in its J20 project...its good for China's national security.


----------



## shuttler

xuxu1457 said:


> Who knows the real number? Even 100 cost 6.5billion only 5% of China's one year defence budget, not a big deal



if that price is right it is a good deal and better than Rafale which is @ $100 mio each. 
100 planes is not many let alone 24 and the aircraft will be delivered over say 5 years time


----------



## indoPunjabi

This beast of a fighter jet could knock off rafale any time of the day!


----------



## JayAtl

*whoa whoa..* we've told so often here by the Chinese about how great their home made military aircraft's are and how they laugh at other countries buying high numbers of foreign aircraft's... what happened?


----------



## Genesis

I always supported more, at this point China needs numbers, there's only so many factories and so many planes China can make a year.

Best if it can be all made in Russia. More expensive, yes, but also will up the advanced fighter's number.

As to China having 5th gen development and thus have access to more advanced systems for J-31, J-20, maybe. But China at this point can't match US even in numbers of planes produced, so having a foriegn manufacturer is still good.

Besides, who knows when the fifth gen will be out, and even if finished when we will have sufficent numbers for it to be effective, even if effective, when we will have the right strategies and other systems to go with the J-20s. So I foresee 5th gen to be effective in 2020ish at least. 

J-35 is the best fighter available right now. Why not have it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

JayAtl said:


> *whoa whoa..* we've told so often here by the Chinese about how great their home made military aircraft's are and how they laugh at other countries buying high numbers of foreign aircraft's... what happened?



Simple just do your math Mr. 64=65: we're great of making our "home made military aircraft" and we will be even more greater if we can improve our aircraft from technologies abroad, Su-35 is a window of oportunity...get it? , As for quantities, people can speculate...24, 48..100...but you can expect that with large order Russian must offer us something interesting in return, or we will stick with our J-11 and J-15, J-16 if the offer is not worth...only future will tell what is the deal.



indoPunjabi said:


> This beast of a fighter jet could knock off rafale any time of the day!



Try p1$$ Russia with your Rafale, C-17, Chenook, Apache deals, they will sure know how to return your favor, We Chineses don't have great expectation from Russians but if they're willing to make some interesting offer...we're more than happy to welcome them, we're looking forward to replace our J-11 in Tibet with SU-35 if this deal pass. 








JD_In said:


> guess China has lost confidence in its J20 project...its good for China's national security.



J-20 is our future investment and is un-stoppable even without the proper engines, you Indians can comforted yourself with a bollywood dream that we abandon this project

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

indoPunjabi said:


> This beast of a fighter jet could knock off rafale any time of the day!



Not really,SPECTRA EW with data fusion is only matched by superhornet and f-22 currently electronically.In NATO MACE XIII exercise in slovakia,where NATO members participated against slovakian S-300 system f-16 all other aircraft suffered heavy simulated losses to s-300 system.The only plane which was found immune was RAFALE due to its Epic EW suite.
Also METEOR is best BVR on the planet.And Rafale has far lesser RCS and AESA radar to su-35 PESA.RAFALE can easily take on any flanker .
Su-35 big advantage Is in 3d TVC though.Once in WVR rafale in disadvantge.


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Simple just do your math Mr. 64=65: we're great of making our "home made military aircraft" and we will be even more greater if we can improve our aircraft from technologies abroad, Su-35 is a window of oportunity...get it? , As for quantities, people can speculate...24, 48..100...but you can expect that with large order Russian must offer us something interesting in return, or we will stick with our J-11 and J-15, J-16 if the offer is not worth...only future will tell what is the deal.
> 
> 
> 
> Try p1$$ Russia with your Rafale, C-17, Chenook, Apache deals, they will sure know how to return your favor, We Chineses don't have great expectation from Russians but if they're willing to make some interesting offer...we're more than happy to welcome them, we're looking forward to replace our J-11 in Tibet with SU-35 if this deal pass.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> J-20 is our future investment and is un-stoppable even without the proper engines, you Indians can comforted yourself with a bollywood dream that we abandon this project



We don't need bollywood dream,by all means go ahead with j-20.Worry would have been if u got t-50.
A fifth gen fighter that is modified failed 1990s mig 1.44 design,without russian permission engine can't supercruise or TVC,and stealth design with canards..thats what happens when u blindly copy design from mig1.44.We are very happy at t-50 vs j-20 scenario....i congratulate u on the future investment.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

AUSTERLITZ said:


> Not really,SPECTRA EW with data fusion is only matched by superhornet and f-22 currently electronically.In NATO MACE XIII exercise in slovakia,where NATO members participated against slovakian S-300 system f-16 all other aircraft suffered heavy simulated losses to s-300 system.The only plane which was found immune was RAFALE due to its Epic EW suite.
> Also METEOR is best BVR on the planet.And Rafale has far lesser RCS and AESA radar to su-35 PESA.*RAFALE can easily take on any flanker .*Su-35 big advantage Is in 3d TVC though.Once in WVR rafale in disadvantge.



So Are you try to tell us that overhaul SU-35 is inferior to Rafale?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

AUSTERLITZ said:


> We don't need bollywood dream,by all means go ahead with j-20.Worry would have been if u got t-50.
> A fifth gen fighter that is modified failed 1990s mig 1.44 design,without russian permission engine can't supercruise or TVC,and stealth design with canards..thats what happens when u blindly copy design from mig1.44.We are very happy at t-50 vs j-20 scenario....i congratulate u on the future investment.



Oh my gosh..we copy an inferior failed Russiian design (Mig 1.44), I guess that why India is more in favor of western fighter jet such Rafale than Russian's counterpart  , We chinese don't care how you call that as copy and what so ever handicap that J-20 still have such supercruise engine but we're proud of being able to do this baby by ourself...and tell us about India involvement in T-50 which part of your contribution that Indians are proud of ? 

And for T-50 vs J-20 scenario..tell us what made you so happy?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> So Are you try to tell us that overhaul SU-35 is inferior to Rafale?



Yes thats obvious.AESA,SPECTRA EW suite,METEOR BVR,Far less RCS.Su-35s advantage is in close combat with superb performance and TVC.


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Oh my gosh..we copy an inferior failed Russiian design (Mig 1.44), I guess that why India is more in favor of western fighter jet such Rafale than Russian's counterpart  , We chinese don't care how you call that as copy and what so ever handicap that J-20 still have such supercruise engine but we're proud of being able to do this baby by ourself...and tell us about India involvement in T-50 which part of your contribution that Indians are proud of ?
> 
> And for T-50 vs J-20 scenario..tell us what made you so happy?



I never claimed t-50 is indian program,just that its superior to j-20 .We are only taking baby steps in 5th gen tech,Still just coz u asked.Indian contribution is- 35% cost.
''HAL negotiated successfully to get a 25 per cent share of design and development work in the FGFA programme. HAL&#8217;s work share will include critical software including the mission computer, navigation systems, most of the cockpit displays, the counter measure dispensing (CMD) systems and modifying Sukhoi&#8217;s prototype into fighter as per the requirement of the Indian Air Force (IAF).Russian expertise in titanium structures will be complemented by India&#8217;s experience in composites like in the fuselage''
Not much,but its a start.
Wake me up when u get a supercruise engine,first try and stop importing engines from russia though.
As for j-20 vs t-50..no contest at all.One is a modified discarded mig 1.44 upgrade vs a complete new fighter,canards in a stealth fighter..well so much for that.
An aircraft that has no engine and unless russia gives u the engine,no supercruise or TVC nor probably the required thrust for performance worthy of 5th gen fighter.Without these features its a stealthy looking 4th gen fighter not a true 5th gen.
Also does it have a new weapons family designed for it like t-50 has with 14 new weapons.
What about radar,nope nothing yet.... PAK FA aesa already confirmed to have 1500 TR modules with 360-400 km range against a 3m^2 RCS target.
So yes i'm quite happy that if ever push comes to shove our pilots will be sitting on the better plane.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 26-K

when will these fake su-35 crap stop coming out...


----------



## That Guy

JD_In said:


> guess China has lost confidence in its J20 project...its good for China's national security.



Where on earth did you get that idea from? When did China lose confidence on it's J-20 project?


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

AUSTERLITZ said:


> I never claimed t-50 is indian program,just that its superior to j-20 .We are only taking baby steps in 5th gen tech,Still just coz u asked.Indian contribution is- 35% cost.
> ''HAL negotiated successfully to get a 25 per cent share of design and development work in the FGFA programme. HAL&#8217;s work share will include critical software including the mission computer, navigation systems, most of the cockpit displays, the counter measure dispensing (CMD) systems and modifying Sukhoi&#8217;s prototype into fighter as per the requirement of the Indian Air Force (IAF).Russian expertise in titanium structures will be complemented by India&#8217;s experience in composites like in the fuselage''
> Not much,but its a start.
> Wake me up when u get a supercruise engine,first try and stop importing engines from russia though.
> As for j-20 vs t-50..no contest at all.One is a modified discarded mig 1.44 upgrade vs a complete new fighter,canards in a stealth fighter..well so much for that.
> An aircraft that has no engine and unless russia gives u the engine,no supercruise or TVC nor probably the required thrust for performance worthy of 5th gen fighter.Without these features its a stealthy looking 4th gen fighter not a true 5th gen.
> Also does it have a new weapons family designed for it like t-50 has with 14 new weapons.
> What about radar,nope nothing yet.... PAK FA aesa already confirmed to have 1500 TR modules with 360-400 km range against a 3m^2 RCS target.
> So yes i'm quite happy that if ever push comes to shove our pilots will be sitting on the better plane.



Lol you make some contribution to your FGFA doesn't mean Russia will use it for their own T-50, and what do they care if FGFA crash, the warranty will be voided due to your own modifications...they could blame your for your solfwares and composite elements.If I was them I'm more than happy to keep my hand clean about FGFA and let you mess up to make it as super-LCA which all software and composite structures are done by Indians.

For our J-20's supercruise engine...we're not in the rush...we haven't yet declared ourself to compete against anyone so we can relaxe and do thing at our pace. As I said ealier, we don't expect Russia to do us any favor to seal the supercruise or TVC engine and we're not going to die without its neither.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## That Guy

26-K said:


> when will these fake su-35 crap stop coming out...



When people smarten up, which will be never. A hundred years from now, we'll get the same headline "China and Russia about to sign Su-135 deal".


----------



## JayAtl

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Simple just do your math Mr. 64=65: we're great of making our "home made military aircraft" and we will be even more greater if we can improve our aircraft from technologies abroad, Su-35 is a window of oportunity...get it? , As for quantities, people can speculate...24, 48..100...but you can expect that with large order Russian must offer us something interesting in return, or we will stick with our J-11 and J-15, J-16 if the offer is not worth...only future will tell what is the deal.
> 
> 
> 
> Try p1$$ Russia with your Rafale, C-17, Chenook, Apache deals, they will sure know how to return your favor, We Chineses don't have great expectation from Russians but if they're willing to make some interesting offer...we're more than happy to welcome them, we're looking forward to replace our J-11 in Tibet with SU-35 if this deal pass.
> 
> 
> J-20 is our future investment and is un-stoppable even without the proper engines, you Indians can comforted yourself with a bollywood dream that we abandon this project





quality not quantity my dear Chinese. India has practically access to every great military tech from the world- you have Russia only. Hence you are buying aircraft's that not just India but many many others found not to be the best in class. But I get it- you are buying it to reverse engineer it...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

That Guy said:


> When people smarten up, which will be never. A hundred years from now, we'll get the same headline "China and Russia about to sign Su-135 deal".



Believe me,nothing will please indian defence observers more than seeing this deal cancelled.We are with china on this one.


----------



## Cat12345

aliaselin said:


> China will be more focus on J-15 and J-16.
> J-15 for 150
> J-16 > 200
> this makes the production capacity of China is not sufficient



Thanks for the information.


----------



## Cat12345

AUSTERLITZ said:


> Also METEOR is best BVR on the planet. RAFALE can easily take on any flanker. Su-35 big advantage Is in 3d TVC though.Once in WVR rafale in disadvantge.



Forgot to add the Pheonix weapon system that the F-14 carried which is another great BVR missile next to Meteor. 

I purposely, don't understand how could a Flanker beat the Rafale. the Sukhoi has better aerodynamics, 3D TVC etc. In WVR the Flanker isn't going to use its fancy maneuvers like the Kulbit, Cobra. While Rafale is using non vectoring engines. But the Rafale has Meteor and Flanker doesn't. But it's only mattered to the pilots well trained.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shuttler

Su-35 at the 2013 Paris Airshow

[youku]XNTcyODM3OTM2[/youku]


----------



## shuttler

JayAtl said:


> quality not quantity my dear Chinese.



Thank you for speaking to indian cheerleaders on behalf of us in respect of indian productions



> India has practically access to every great military tech from the world- you have Russia only. Hence you are buying aircraft's that not just India but many many others found not to be the best in class. But I get it- you are buying it to reverse engineer it...



and india is still behind China in almost everything. You are fumbling to fix your devaluating rupees for payment of foreign bills

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## JayAtl

shuttler said:


> Thank you for speaking to indian cheerleaders on behalf of us in respect of indian productions
> 
> 
> 
> and india is still behind China in almost everything. You are fumbling to fix your devaluating rupees for payment of foreign bills



yes , be proud that you are a slightly better yet a 3rd world country too, while having 4 x the GDP... congrats .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

JayAtl said:


> quality not quantity my dear Chinese. India has practically access to every great military tech from the world- you have Russia only. Hence you are buying aircraft's that not just India but many many others found not to be the best in class. But I get it- you are buying it to reverse engineer it...



What you consider to be the best is debatable, we're not judge a book just by it's cover, if Russia offer something that what we need and interesting than there is great chance that the deal will get though...we don't really care what people get used to believe that wester military is best compaire to Russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JayAtl

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> What you consider to be the best is debatable, we're not just a book just by it's cover, if Russia offer something that what we need and interesting than there is great chance that the deal will get though...we don't really care what people get used to believe that wester military is best compaire to Russia.



Very difficult to understand much of your post from the gibberish you posted. But what I don't consider debatable is the fact that you/ china are behind at least 20 years of NATO/ US tech. there is no debate about that...none what so ever!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

JayAtl said:


> Very difficult to understand much of your post from the gibberish you posted. But what I don't consider debatable is the fact that you/ china are behind at least 20 years of NATO/ US tech. there is no debate about that...none what so ever!



Dude, there is nothing gibberish about my post, you're bragging that India is able to access to the world best military while China can only have Russia as option...so I assume that you want to compare Su-35 to Rafale, F-16, F-18 and Typhoon... it has nothing to do with what china's 20 years behind Nato/ U.S tech.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## antonius123

JayAtl said:


> Very difficult to understand much of your post from the gibberish you posted. But what I don't consider debatable is the fact that you/ china are behind at least 20 years of NATO/ US tech. there is no debate about that...none what so ever!



20 years behind NATO is very debatable.
J-20 is beyond any European made a/c.
Some may even beyond what Nato has (DF21D)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nishan_101

But it has some improved SU-35 capabilities like FBW controls integration with TVC nozzles... 

Which is amazing...

I think Block-II JF-17 will have 3D TVC


----------



## romia

JayAtl said:


> Very difficult to understand much of your post from the gibberish you posted. But what I don't consider debatable is the fact that you/ china are behind at least 20 years of NATO/ US tech. there is no debate about that...none what so ever!



I dont care how many yrs we behind the NATO or US
I do believe we have the diversity of power to demolish the US at least as twice times.that's enough to stop anyone wanna to attack China .That's ur indian cannot right now.


----------



## JayAtl

romia said:


> I dont care how many yrs we behind the NATO or US
> I do believe we have the diversity of power to demolish the US at least as twice times.that's enough to stop anyone wanna to attack China .That's ur indian cannot right now.



"diversity of power to demolish the US twice"???  , You sound like Baghdad Bob- or Beijing Bob in this case.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JayAtl

antonius123 said:


> 20 years behind NATO is very debatable.
> J-20 is beyond any European made a/c.
> Some may even beyond what Nato has (DF21D)



not debatable per your military heads... they are quoted as saying it too. then, other than state run media hype where they even call a casino ship an A/c carrier... your so called higher military hardware is untested and never put forth to be scrutinized by the world. Just have to take China's word at it. The irony is that one has to be brainwashed to think China has taken over on military technology over the likes of Russia. The double irony is - you are/ we are discussing China buying 100 Russian aircraft's and you claiming that you at par or near par with the US on military tech...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## manojb

"
AIN asked about the short takeoff demonstrated during the opening day&#8217;s performance. Bogdan said the takeoff run was about 250 to 300 meters, thanks to Su-35S&#8217;s thrust vectoring and high thrust-to-weight ratio.* &#8220;Short takeoff is another useful feature of the thrust-vectored Sukhoi fighters,&#8221; he said. &#8220;We demonstrated it before on the Su-30MKI. *More power available on the Su-35S allows me to set the plane into high pitch upon liftoff and then make a sharp turn.&#8221;"

High Thrust-to-Weight Propels Su-35S's Paris Demo


----------



## antonius123

JayAtl said:


> not debatable per your military heads... they are quoted as saying it too. then, other than state run media hype where they even call a casino ship an A/c carrier... your so called higher military hardware is untested and never put forth to be scrutinized by the world. Just have to take China's word at it. The irony is that one has to be brainwashed to think China has taken over on military technology over the likes of Russia. The double irony is - you are/ we are discussing China buying 100 Russian aircraft's and you claiming that you at par or near par with the US on military tech...



The argument is logical error.

Untested weapon doesnt mean lame weapon, so if nobody can assure that the chinese weapon is lame or great that means the 20 years gap is debatable.

Besides, many of Europe / US / Rusia latest weapon are untested yet too. Su-35BM, Eurofighter, Rafale, F-22 has never involve in engagement yet with comparable a/c fighter, neither F-35, etc.

No country in the world other than USA ever scrutinize F-22 either.
China never overhype their weapon capability. It is western analyst that make their own assesment/analysis on chinese weapon (J-20, ASBM/DF-21, ABM.)

Nobody claim that china technology is already on par with USA. There is still technology gap, and how far the gap depent on what kind of technology. For example: for midcourse ABM - practically china is on par with USA; but other kind of weapon could be 10 year gap or more.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JayAtl

antonius123 said:


> The argument is logical error.
> 
> Untested weapon doesnt mean lame weapon, so if nobody can assure that the chinese weapon is lame or great that means the 20 years gap is debatable.
> 
> Besides, many of Europe / US / Rusia latest weapon are untested yet too. Su-35BM, Eurofighter, Rafale, F-22 has never involve in engagement yet with comparable a/c fighter, neither F-35, etc.
> 
> No country in the world other than USA ever scrutinize F-22 either.
> China never overhype their weapon capability. It is western analyst that make their own assesment/analysis on chinese weapon (J-20, ASBM/DF-21, ABM.)
> 
> Nobody claim that china technology is already on par with USA. There is still technology gap, and how far the gap depent on what kind of technology. For example: for midcourse ABM - practically china is on par with USA; but other kind of weapon could be 10 year gap or more.



I think there is a comprehension gap here. Your OWN MILITARY CHIEF said china's military technology is 20 years back... do you comprehend that? This is no western analyst , it is your own military head.

secondly F22, rafale , eurofighter have ALL been tested in a war theater. Perhaps you are not aware of the wars, but Iraq, libya, Afghanistan were test beds for the analysis. Rafale and eurofighter used missions in libya to show other buyers about how successful their aircraft's were. US F22 stealth technology is also proven and not debatable among military experts.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## walle990

JayAtl said:


> I think there is a comprehension gap here. Your OWN MILITARY CHIEF said china's military technology is 20 years back... do you comprehend that? This is no western analyst , it is your own military head.
> 
> secondly F22, rafale , eurofighter have ALL been tested in a war theater. Perhaps you are not aware of the wars, but Iraq, libya, Afghanistan were test beds for the analysis. Rafale and eurofighter used missions in libya to show other buyers about how successful their aircraft's were. US F22 stealth technology is also proven and not debatable among military experts.



F22 has never been tested in a war you smart ***. In fact none of those fighters have been testing against highly capable SAM systems or another jet fighter of a similar calibre. Bombing defenseless 3rd world military targets and civilian government building does not prove how effective they are in a full blown war.

secondly, what the chinese military chief said was over 2 years ago when the US was about to start their "pivot" to asia taking in the context that China does not intend to challenge the US . It was to calm nerves, what did you expect ? The chinese general say they will start a war with NATO tomorrow? China is already fully capable of defending against any US action around China and both in the SCS and ECS, there is no point to match the exuberant military budget and capabilites of the US right now, when the Chinese military match the US it will come naturally as the country develops.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JayAtl

walle990 said:


> F22 has never been tested in a war you smart ***. In fact none of those fighters have been testing against highly capable SAM systems or another jet fighter of a similar calibre. Bombing defenseless 3rd world military targets and civilian government building does not prove how effective they are in a full blown war.
> 
> secondly, what the chinese military chief said was over 2 years ago when the US was about to start their "pivot" to asia taking in the context that China does not intend to challenge the US . It was to calm nerves, what did you expect ? The chinese general say they will start a war with NATO tomorrow? China is already fully capable of defending against any US action around China and both in the SCS and ECS, there is no point to match the exuberant military budget and capabilites of the US right now, when the Chinese military match the US it will come naturally as the country develops.



If you think the F22 is not proven and accepted as being unquestionably capable of all it has stated BY EVERY MILITARY in the world - then we know you are but a civilian w/ no interest, background or knowledge about military hardware. 

If Chinese military head said that they 20yrs behind the US because they were afraid , after all that is basically what you are claiming now, because the US was pivoting to the Asia Pacific theater-- then I will take as an innovative , yet flawed excuse. 

Irony is that you begging to be considered better than 20 yrs behind- yet you have not developed even a capable , forget world class aircraft engine. You have a casino ship as an A/C. I would put you 20 yrs behind the Russians, forget the US in that equation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

walle990 said:


> F22 has never been tested in a war you smart ***. In fact none of those fighters have been testing against highly capable SAM systems or another jet fighter of a similar calibre.


How do you know those SAM systems are 'highly capable' in the first place? Ever thought of that?



walle990 said:


> Bombing defenseless 3rd world military targets and civilian government building does not prove how effective they are in a full blown war.


It proved at least one thing: that bombing is capable and more than the PLA have done.



walle990 said:


> secondly, what the chinese military chief said was over 2 years ago when the US was about to start their "pivot" to asia taking in the context that China does not intend to challenge the US . It was to calm nerves, what did you expect ? The chinese general say they will start a war with NATO tomorrow? *China is already fully capable of defending against any US action* around China and both in the SCS and ECS, there is no point to match the exuberant military budget and capabilites of the US right now, when the Chinese military match the US it will come naturally as the country develops.


How do you know when the PLA have no comparable combat experience?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Genesis

gambit said:


> How do you know those SAM systems are 'highly capable' in the first place? Ever thought of that?
> 
> 
> It proved at least one thing: that bombing is capable and more than the PLA have done.
> 
> 
> How do you know when the PLA have no comparable combat experience?



Well, can't say how capable PLA is, but do you agree that they at least have some capability, is it more or less than Saddam's forces?


----------



## antonius123

JayAtl said:


> I think there is a comprehension gap here. Your OWN MILITARY CHIEF said china's military technology is 20 years back... do you comprehend that? This is no western analyst , it is your own military head.
> 
> secondly F22, rafale , eurofighter have ALL been tested in a war theater. Perhaps you are not aware of the wars, but Iraq, libya, Afghanistan were test beds for the analysis. Rafale and eurofighter used missions in libya to show other buyers about how successful their aircraft's were. US F22 stealth technology is also proven and not debatable among military experts.



What china military chief statement about 20 years gap is conflicting with your own statement that China is overhyping. In fact it prove that China doesnt overhype but be humble.

Like I said, it is not china who said china new weapon is advanced and narrowing gap with those of USA technology level, but it is western analyst. China chief military in fact is trying to calm down western restless due to china rapid progress in military tech by saying that china is still lag 20 years (sun tzu tactic). Like I said: chinese midcourse ABM, ASBM, and other missile cannot be considered 20 years lag, also J-10B could be on par with Eurofighter/Rafale, and J-20 could be ahead of European a/c.

Like I said: F-22, Rafale, Eurofighter never do any engagement with other comparable air fighter. What they do in middle east recently was only mission related to ground attack.


----------



## walle990

gambit said:


> How do you know those SAM systems are 'highly capable' in the first place? Ever thought of that?
> 
> 
> It proved at least one thing: that bombing is capable and more than the PLA have done.
> 
> 
> How do you know when the PLA have no comparable combat experience?



My post must have struck a cord with you.

First, SAMs are as tested the fighter jets mentioned above, the problem is the west has been too scared to even deploy any of their fighters to go up against any modern SAMs. 

Secondly, Whats the difference between the West and China? China conduct exercises dropping smart bombs as part of their training. They don't target foreign civilian government buildings and alleged military installations.

Finally, American military's mentality is pretty well known, when the going gets tough the Americans stalls or retreats. That sums up American military adventurism post WWII.


----------



## gambit

walle990 said:


> My post must have struck a cord with you.


A funny bone, to be exact. 



walle990 said:


> First, SAMs are as tested the fighter jets mentioned above, the problem is the west has been too scared to even deploy any of their fighters to go up against any modern SAMs.


So how many of those Western jets did these SAMs shot down?



walle990 said:


> Secondly, Whats the difference between the West and China? China conduct exercises dropping smart bombs as part of their training. They don't target foreign civilian government buildings and alleged military installations.


We dropped bombs on test targets as well.



walle990 said:


> Finally, American military's mentality is pretty well known, when the going gets tough the Americans stalls or retreats. That sums up American military adventurism post WWII.


Iraq and Afghanistan would beg to differ.

You sounds like a twelve yr old. Your 'logic' certainly reflects it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

Genesis said:


> Well, can't say how capable PLA is, but do you agree that they at least have some capability, is it more or less than Saddam's forces?


There is no comparison between the PLA of today to the Iraqi Army of Desert Storm. I will bring it up again -- but the PLA predicted that the US-led alliance would suffer casualties similar to the Vietnam War in winning over Iraq. That prediction seriously embarrassed the PLA and led to the reforms that we see today. I say this kindly -- look at the PLA today and you will see the US military all over.

But at the same time, the US military today is not the same as we were in Desert Storm. It may sounds strange but I was both blase and amazed at what we did in Desert Storm in terms of overwhelming an enemy. I was blase at how well we integrated our forces and attacks but amazed at the scale of it, as in utter domination of the battlefields (plural). All armies practices combined arms tactics to some degrees, even back in WW I, but no one did it on the scale that we did as in Desert Storm, and it was the scale of it that shocked military professionals worldwide. That does not mean we found no flaws in what we did. In fact, analysts immediately took apart successes to find flaws and ways to eliminate or reduce the factors contributed to those flaws. No one, not even the technically minded Germans, did it as swiftly as we did. The depth of self criticisms also shocked military professionals worldwide. It started from the top the rapidly poured, not merely trickled, down to the unit levels. I still remember the briefings outlining how we performed in generating sorties and how it could have better support the air war. The self criticisms portions lasted longer than the self congratulatory speeches.

Like it or not, your PLA is at best as half as professional as the US military. An obvious sign of that arrogance is how military badged cars flaunts traffic laws in China.

Rules of the road in the People's Republic of China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


> A vehicle with a government or military plate are not subject to the Road Traffic Safety Law of the People's Republic of China (&#20013;&#21326;&#20154;&#27665;&#20849;&#21644;&#22269;&#36947;&#36335;&#20132;&#36890;&#23433;&#20840;&#27861; they may run red lights, drive in the wrong direction or weave in and out of traffic.


Is this true? In the US, a local sheriff can handcuff a general or admiral easily.

If there is a shooting war between US and China, your PLA will be 'shocked and awed' again. Except this time it will be far worse than being red faced over a report.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Genesis

gambit said:


> There is no comparison between the PLA of today to the Iraqi Army of Desert Storm. I will bring it up again -- but the PLA predicted that the US-led alliance would suffer casualties similar to the Vietnam War in winning over Iraq. That prediction seriously embarrassed the PLA and led to the reforms that we see today. I say this kindly -- look at the PLA today and you will see the US military all over.
> 
> But at the same time, the US military today is not the same as we were in Desert Storm. It may sounds strange but I was both blase and amazed at what we did in Desert Storm in terms of overwhelming an enemy. I was blase at how well we integrated our forces and attacks but amazed at the scale of it, as in utter domination of the battlefields (plural). All armies practices combined arms tactics to some degrees, even back in WW I, but no one did it on the scale that we did as in Desert Storm, and it was the scale of it that shocked military professionals worldwide. That does not mean we found no flaws in what we did. In fact, analysts immediately took apart successes to find flaws and ways to eliminate or reduce the factors contributed to those flaws. No one, not even the technically minded Germans, did it as swiftly as we did. The depth of self criticisms also shocked military professionals worldwide. It started from the top the rapidly poured, not merely trickled, down to the unit levels. I still remember the briefings outlining how we performed in generating sorties and how it could have better support the air war. The self criticisms portions lasted longer than the self congratulatory speeches.
> 
> Like it or not, your PLA is at best as half as professional as the US military. An obvious sign of that arrogance is how military badged cars flaunts traffic laws in China.
> 
> Rules of the road in the People's Republic of China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Is this true? In the US, a local sheriff can handcuff a general or admiral easily.
> 
> If there is a shooting war between US and China, your PLA will be 'shocked and awed' again. Except this time it will be far worse than being red faced over a report.



Thank you for at least thinking that we are about half as professional as Americans.

Talking about IRaq war of 03 BTW.

So, do you think you can just as easily steam roll us as you did there? Do you think we are trained the same? Do you think any of our men will surrender like the Iraq army? Do you think the equipment difference is as big. 

Also the Germans attacked France, another great power, not a middle eastern nut case. 

Lastly, to me professionalism isn't the same as readiness. Our men are well trained, our officers are university graduates, our weapons developed and maintained by experts, That I believe is professionalism. 

Readiness is another thing all together.

Now there are obviously things wrong with the army, but that is more of a thinking China won't go to war and thus, some may be a tad more relaxed than they should be. But with the recent, developments, you don't seriously think China isn't even a little prepared for war? 



As a side note, I never supported a war with Japan or US. Not because of afriad of loss, but how do you achieve victory? In the sense of a treaty is signed. Same applies to US.

You think China or US will negotiate for peace if there is a defeat? I doubt that, same applies to Japan. So how would victory be achieved,, occupation of Tokyo, or Beijing? How likely do you think either is going to be.

The CCP's legitimacy lies in protecting the people, the minute they admit defeat is the minute they lose their power so I doubt they would admit defeat. As to Japan, seriously, we both seen how they fight. And we can barely hurt US mainland short of Nukes, and that would be bad, cause of MAD.


----------



## gambit

Genesis said:


> Talking about IRaq war of 03 BTW.
> 
> So, do you think you can just as easily steam roll us as you did there? Do you think we are trained the same? Do you think any of our men will surrender like the Iraq army? Do you think the equipment difference is as big.


We will decimate the PLAAF. We will drive the PLAAF from any airspace and we will inflict great damages on many PLAAF bases, to the point that the PLAAF will be rendered either impotent to contribute to the Chinese side of the war or be destroyed completely. We may not do as quickly as we did to the Iraqis back in Desert Storm, but we will achieve the goal of taking Chinese airspace away from the PLAAF.

It is unlikely that there will be a ground war. I will concede that the PLA is too powerful for that. But if we are to set foot on Chinese soil, we will gain some ground temporarily to help prosecute the air war deeper into China. I am not privy to any 'Top Secret' war plans but I am confident that in a shooting fight between US and China, the air war will dominate even more than Desert Storm. So no, I do not expect PLA troops to surrender simply because they will not have anyone to surrender to.



Genesis said:


> Also the Germans attacked France, another great power, not a middle eastern nut case.


My point was that the Germans are known to be an exacting and methodical people. No different with warfare. So it does not matter who they attacked in history. What mattered was that the Germans were impressed at how quickly we began to analyze the successes of Desert Storm. You should understand that in any event that contains high unpredictability and uncertainty like a war, eyewitnesses memory are crucial and their testimonies should be recorded as soon as possible. It does not matter if you find contradictions, from on high and down low. As long as you can record their testimonies you can correlate or discard later when time permit. We began the process sooner than expected.



Genesis said:


> Lastly, to me professionalism isn't the same as readiness. Our men are well trained, our officers are university graduates, our weapons developed and maintained by experts, That I believe is professionalism.
> 
> Readiness is another thing all together.


Then you have an incomplete understanding of professionalism. Yes, it is not the same as readiness. But professionalism directly influences on how readiness is achieved in terms of metrics and if the direction of readiness is appropriate. For example, since China have access to only one ocean, the Pacific, it would be foolish for the PLAN to have the same amount of aircraft carriers as the USN -- at this time. So if the PLAN is readied but the PLA and the PLAAF have to beg for money because of clashing egos among your generals and admirals, then your readiness is misplaced.



Genesis said:


> Now there are obviously things wrong with the army, but that is more of a thinking China won't go to war and thus, some may be a tad more relaxed than they should be. But with the recent, developments, *you don't seriously think China isn't even a little prepared for war? *


Against US? No, China is not prepared. Not even halfway. Your generals and admirals know this.


----------



## HK Indian MBT

manojb said:


> "
> AIN asked about the short takeoff demonstrated during the opening day&#8217;s performance. Bogdan said the takeoff run was about 250 to 300 meters, thanks to Su-35S&#8217;s thrust vectoring and high thrust-to-weight ratio.* &#8220;Short takeoff is another useful feature of the thrust-vectored Sukhoi fighters,&#8221; he said. &#8220;We demonstrated it before on the Su-30MKI. *More power available on the Su-35S allows me to set the plane into high pitch upon liftoff and then make a sharp turn.&#8221;"
> 
> High Thrust-to-Weight Propels Su-35S's Paris Demo



Why India not buying Su 35. Its a great machine than Su 30 MKI. Even Super Sukoi may come closer to Su 35 but its not Su 35... please shed some light on it


----------



## Lure

gambit said:


> We will decimate the PLAAF. We will drive the PLAAF from any airspace and we will inflict great damages on many PLAAF bases, to the point that the PLAAF will be rendered either impotent to contribute to the Chinese side of the war or be destroyed completely. We may not do as quickly as we did to the Iraqis back in Desert Storm, but we will achieve the goal of taking Chinese airspace away from the PLAAF.
> 
> It is unlikely that there will be a ground war. I will concede that the PLA is too powerful for that. But if we are to set foot on Chinese soil, we will gain some ground temporarily to help prosecute the air war deeper into China. I am not privy to any 'Top Secret' war plans but I am confident that in a shooting fight between US and China, the air war will dominate even more than Desert Storm. So no, I do not expect PLA troops to surrender simply because they will not have anyone to surrender to.
> 
> 
> My point was that the Germans are known to be an exacting and methodical people. No different with warfare. So it does not matter who they attacked in history. What mattered was that the Germans were impressed at how quickly we began to analyze the successes of Desert Storm. You should understand that in any event that contains high unpredictability and uncertainty like a war, eyewitnesses memory are crucial and their testimonies should be recorded as soon as possible. It does not matter if you find contradictions, from on high and down low. As long as you can record their testimonies you can correlate or discard later when time permit. We began the process sooner than expected.
> 
> 
> Then you have an incomplete understanding of professionalism. Yes, it is not the same as readiness. But professionalism directly influences on how readiness is achieved in terms of metrics and if the direction of readiness is appropriate. For example, since China have access to only one ocean, the Pacific, it would be foolish for the PLAN to have the same amount of aircraft carriers as the USN -- at this time. So if the PLAN is readied but the PLA and the PLAAF have to beg for money because of clashing egos among your generals and admirals, then your readiness is misplaced.
> 
> 
> Against US? No, China is not prepared. Not even halfway. Your generals and admirals know this.



Question : 

When you occupied Iraq you had more air bases around. And Iraqis had no capability to damage them in any sense. On the other hand when the US invades China from it's east;

- 3 air bases in Japan 
- 2 air bases in ROK
- 1 air base in Guam 

And only the one on Guam is politically legitimate to use in such an invasion. The Japanese might not create that much problem, what I don't see ROK is going to make US use that bases easily for such an invasion. 

Second, China has every capability to damage or completely destroy those bases. It's missle force today is overwhelming for any defence since they can send hundereds of them (a considerable amount of them from mobile sites which makes them harder to locate and shoot from air). 

I'm not talking about ASAT technology since we don't know how many US satellites it will be able to shoot and what would be it's impact. I will also not talk about Carrier Killer missles because according to my observations about the US military they will keep them out of the game until they are sure about the carrier killer missles won't function. 

So I'm quite doubtful that it will be as easy as you think. However even if happens, at the moment an american soldier steps on the Chinese soil (which means PLAAF is losing) than probably you will see an SLBM fired from type094 going to the Washington to kill your president. Don't you think China will press doom's day button if you humiliate them like that?


----------



## Psyops

gambit said:


> A funny bone, to be exact.
> 
> 
> So how many of those Western jets did these SAMs shot down?
> 
> 
> We dropped bombs on test targets as well.
> 
> 
> Iraq and Afghanistan would beg to differ.
> 
> You sounds like a twelve yr old. Your 'logic' certainly reflects it.



What's funny was when our volunteer army made an absolute total mockery of the the 'invinsible' American military you know when and how 

US has NEVER defeated China and never EVER will. You can bet your 1 bedroom apartment on that son. US can't even beat Iraq and Afghanistan 
If the US fought the PLA now, the PLA would make mince meat out of the overrated and grossly overhyped US military.

Now get back to what you do best.... Grab that playstation controller and play your game kiddo 

Go on now....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## applesauce

gambit said:


> We will decimate the PLAAF. We will drive the PLAAF from any airspace and we will inflict great damages on many PLAAF bases, to the point that the PLAAF will be rendered either impotent to contribute to the Chinese side of the war or be destroyed completely. We may not do as quickly as we did to the Iraqis back in Desert Storm, but we will achieve the goal of taking Chinese airspace away from the PLAAF.


only if the US moves most its forces to this fictional war within china(let us not forget china has even greater manufracturing capability(amount) than the US and has the capability to strike all near by air bases-carriers included), this would leave vast gaps and duties elsewhere in the world completely unfulfilled. but then things would probably go nuclear so i guess those gaps and duties dont really matter anymore. then again the current goal is not to fight the US, the PLA knows it cannot win in the air or the water in a long war with the US, its goal to be able to cause such losses for the US that they would not fight unless their very core interests are affected(which any chinese leader would take care to avoid)




gambit said:


> It is unlikely that there will be a ground war. I will concede that the PLA is too powerful for that. But if we are to set foot on Chinese soil, we will gain some ground temporarily to help prosecute the air war deeper into China. I am not privy to any 'Top Secret' war plans but I am confident that in a shooting fight between US and China, the air war will dominate even more than Desert Storm. So no, I do not expect PLA troops to surrender simply because they will not have anyone to surrender to.


basically the US will have as much luck physically occupying china as the PLA does physically occupying the US(assuming they magically get teleport to the US)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## victor07

Some news on current topic.
Taken from russian media militaryparitet-com_ttp_data_ic_ttp_6009_ which in turn translated from chinese article mil-news-sina-com-cn_2013-07-23_0929732367-html (replace '-' with '.' and '_' with '/' except "2013-07-23". Chinese expert reports his opinion on su-35 deal.
Su-35's (Irbis) radar is more powerful then general fighter airborne radar. By capabilities of this radar U.S. advantage in stealth aircrafts can be significantly pulled down. Then he counts some other su-35's new features. Then he talks about benefits of buying su-35. Some general words and finally: China is very interested in 117s engine. China is still in demand for Russian engines. Also China needs to look carefully at Irbis radar. And at last China wishes to have new russian long range missiles. Since Russia refused to sell single parts or subsystems China needs to buy the whole system i.e. su-35. Also he mentioned that su-35 can help to close gap until J-20 and J-31 will be ready for production.


----------



## conworldus

In so far the whole Su-35 deal is still just Russian media reports. I am not sure if any of the stats claimed by the Russians are true since there has not been a third party testing. On the outset, the Su-35 does not stand out as anything different from its predecessors, and the much hyped Irbis radar, which is not even AESA, has not had third party testing and evaluation either.

I think it is prudent to say that, until China has thoroughly evaluated the Su-35, a purchase is still very unlikely. The deal of course can serve a closer ties between China and Russia, but I think more concret building blocks of this relationship is the oil and gas deal.

With all that said, until the contract is signed, all we hear is just rumor.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Luftwaffe

I read authentic News that Russian AF Chief called SU-35 inferior to Western Counterparts.

Russian AF chief: US fighters superior to Su-35S - The DEW Line

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Fsjal

I wonder if Russia hypes up their weapons. Also, they make up claims saying China will purchase their Su-35.


----------



## satishkumarcsc

Luftwaffe said:


> I read authentic News that Russian AF Chief called SU-35 inferior to Western Counterparts.
> 
> Russian AF chief: US fighters superior to Su-35S - The DEW Line



Comparing SU 35 to F 22 and F 35 the American aircrafts are much better. But compared to their legacy fighters...the Su 35 is a beast.


----------



## kingwazzuu

Old news. That Russian general was sacked. I guess for talking nonsense.


----------



## ejaz007

*China to Get Russian Su-35 Jets in 2014 &#8211; Rosoboronexport*







MOSCOW, September 7 (RIA Novosti) &#8211; Moscow and Beijing expect to seal the deal on the sale of Russian Su-35 fighter jets to China in 2014, a senior official at the Russian arms exports monopoly said Saturday.

&#8220;Talks are ongoing, but the deal is unlikely to be sealed before the year&#8217;s end. The signing will most likely take place next year,&#8221; said Viktor Komardin, deputy head of the state-run Rosoboronexport.

&#8220;Chinese negotiators are discussing the technical outlook of the plane,&#8221; Komardin told RIA Novosti.

He did not say how many multirole fighter jets China wants to buy, but added that Beijing is also interested in purchasing ordnance for them.

&#8220;There will definitely be integral weapons, but we&#8217;ll be discussing external weapons,&#8221; Komardin said.

&#8220;They want new types of weapons that we have, including from the [Moscow Region-based] Tactical Missiles Corporation. But that&#8217;ll be a separate deal,&#8221; he said.

Negotiations about China&#8217;s purchase of the Russian Su-35 &#8211; a deep modernization of the Su-27M, the current staple of the Russian Air Force &#8211; were opened in 2010, but frozen last year.

However, Rosoboronexport head Anatoly Isaikin told a group of Chinese pilots during the MAKS airshow in Russia last week that they will &#8220;soon&#8221; have the opportunity to fly the Su-35.

China to Get Russian Su-35 Jets in 2014


----------



## victor07

Can you explain what is the difference between PESA and AESA radars from the combat operational use point of view?I think there is no difference if they have same tactical characteristics.


----------



## conworldus

victor07 said:


> Can you explain what is the difference between PESA and AESA radars from the combat operational use point of view?I think there is no difference if they have same tactical characteristics.



Are you serious???? AESA is so much more powerful in almost every way.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## victor07

It is fake. The link is not reliable. And there is no such interview in russian.

Which exactly?

Exact tactical and techical characteristics comparison. AESA vs PESA


----------



## conworldus

The point is, that since Irbis, being a PESA and has not been tested by the third part, the claimed capability is a little suspect. It doesn't take years to negotiate a contract and China buy SU-35 rumor has been floating around in Russia since 2007. Until the actually contract is signed, any more noises about the Su-35 sounds like propaganda than good journalism.


----------



## victor07

According to your logic as f-22 is not tested outside US, all its stated characteristics are propaganda.


----------



## victor07

AESA means that each element of antenna's aperture is active and emits energy. PESA has one or several powerfull sources of emission which then is distributed over antenna's aperture by means of phase inverting circuits. That is only technology. Both are electronically scanned and computer controlled. That is only technology.


----------



## Luftwaffe

kingwazzuu said:


> Old news. That Russian general was sacked. I guess for talking nonsense.



Russian Air Chief became Chief by merit so he did not speak nonsense he talked truth and he was sacked.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## victor07

Luftwaffe said:


> Russian Air Chief became Chief by merit so he did not speak nonsense he talked truth and he was sacked.



This quotes of russian general are fake. The link is not reliable. There is no such interview in russian.


----------



## Luftwaffe

victor07 said:


> This quotes of russian general are fake. The link is not reliable. There is no such interview in russian.



Prove it wrong if you can.


----------



## Hafizzz

China to Get Russian Su-35 Jets in 2014

OSCOW, September 7 (RIA Novosti)  Moscow and Beijing expect to seal the deal on the sale of Russian Su-35 fighter jets to China in 2014, a senior official at the Russian arms exports monopoly said Saturday.

Talks are ongoing, but the deal is unlikely to be sealed before the years end. The signing will most likely take place next year, said Viktor Komardin, deputy head of the state-run Rosoboronexport.

Chinese negotiators are discussing the technical outlook of the plane, Komardin told RIA Novosti.

He did not say how many multirole fighter jets China wants to buy, but added that Beijing is also interested in purchasing ordnance for them.

There will definitely be integral weapons, but well be discussing external weapons, Komardin said.

They want new types of weapons that we have, including from the [Moscow Region-based] Tactical Missiles Corporation. But thatll be a separate deal, he said.

Negotiations about Chinas purchase of the Russian Su-35  a deep modernization of the Su-27M, the current staple of the Russian Air Force  were opened in 2010, but frozen last year.

However, Rosoboronexport head Anatoly Isaikin told a group of Chinese pilots during the MAKS airshow in Russia last week that they will soon have the opportunity to fly the Su-35.


----------



## cnleio

"Sell" again and again, how many Su-35 Russian news media "sell" to China ?
Come on, just do it quickly.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 26-K

Is someone keeping track of how many times the Russians are "selling" us-35 to us?


----------



## victor07

Luftwaffe said:


> Prove it wrong if you can.



Our dialog seems to be counterproductive. What exactly you want me to prove? First of all you have to post some reliable link to that interview. I can post link to Zelin's interview before MAKS 2011 but it is in Russian. And it contains no such words you quoted.


----------



## rott

wanglaokan said:


> We need make SU35 serve in the PLAAF opposing force to train out pilots. If you could take down a SU35, why not MKI? This decision also will be welcomed by PLAAF pilots.



I have to agree with you. It's a good move to use them as opposing force to train our pilots.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Fsjal

wanglaokan said:


> We need make SU35 serve in the PLAAF opposing force to train out pilots. If you could take down a SU35, why not MKI? This decision also will be welcomed by PLAAF pilots.



Hahaha. Funny thing is that Su-30MKI is inferior to Su-35. If a J-15 can shoot down an Su-35, then an MKI is much more easier to shoot down.


----------



## drunken-monke

Russia and China are moving closer to concluding an agreement whereby Moscow would sell Beijing advanced 4++ generation multirole fighter jets, a senior official from Russias state-run defense industry told media outlets over the weekend.

Viktor Komardin, deputy head of the state-run Rosoboronexport, which is in charge of regulating defense imports and exports, told RIA Novosti on Saturday that negotiations for the sale of Russian Su-35 fighter jets to China are ongoing, and an agreement was likely to be reached sometime in 2014.

Talks are ongoing, but the deal is unlikely to be sealed before the years end. The signing will most likely take place next year, Viktor Komardin said.

The report noted that Komardin did not discuss how many fighter jets China was interested in purchasing, but did say that negotiations included Beijing purchasing ordnance for the advanced, highly maneuverable aircraft.

RIA Novosti also reported that the head of Rosoboronexport recently told Chinese pilots that they would soon have the opportunity to fly the Su-35s.

Moscow and Beijing began negotiating the sale of Su-35s in 2010, but progress was slow and talks were temporarily suspended last year over Russian concerns that China would reverse engineer the planes engines and passive electronically scanned array (PESA) radar systems, according to The Taipei Times.

China has a long history of developing local variants of Russian military systems it purchases from Moscow. Chinas Shenyang J-11B, for example, is believed to be based on the Sukhoi Su-27SK fighter jet. This in part led Russia to drastically reduce the amount and sophistication of its arm sales to China for many years. However, recent years have seen a sharp uptick in Moscows defense exports to Beijing.

Ahead of Xi Jinpings trip to Russia in March, Chinas state-run media reported that the two sides had concluded one of their largest defense deals in over a decade when China agreed to purchase 24 Su-35 jet fighters from Russia and jointly develop four Lada Class air-independent propulsion submarines, which China would then purchase.

However, Russia immediately denied that such an agreement had been reached and even claimed that arms sales would not be discussed by Xi and Russian President Vladimir Putin during the visit. This created confusion on the state of the talks and called into question whether Russia was even still interested in selling China the Su-35s. The recent comments by Rosoboronexport officials clarify that Russia is still indeed interested in selling China the jets. Now, it is merely a question of whether the two sides can come to terms on the specifics of an agreement.

Assuming they can, the Su-35 multirole fighter jets should greatly enhance Chinas air capabilities. Although the Su-35 is derived from the Su-27 fighters that China already has bought and copied, it comes with significant improvements, leading Russia to refer to it as a 4++ generation aircraft.

According to Air Force Technology, the Su-35 has high manoeuvrability (+9g) with a high angle of attack, and is equipped with high-capability weapon systems that contribute to the new aircraft's exceptional dogfighting capability. The maximum level speed is 2,390km/h or Mach 2.25.

Air Force Technology also reports that the Su-35 is capable of carrying numerous air-to-air, air-to-surface and anti-ship missiles. It also says the airplane can be armed with various guided bombs, and that its sensors can detect and track up to 30 airborne targets with a radar cross section (RCS) of 3m² at ranges of 400km using track-while-scan mode.

The same source notes that the aircraft are "powered by two Sturn / UFA AL-31F 117S turbofan engines with thrust-vectoring nozzle control, each supplying 86.3kN thrust or 142.2kN with afterburn."

Here's a video from Russia Today (RT) of the Su-35 "rocking" the Paris Air Show this year. The descripton of the video says that "the Su-35 has been dubbed the 'UFO' for its outstanding maneuverability.

Russia to Sell China Su-35 Multirole Fighter Jets | Flashpoints | The Diplomat


----------



## drunken-monke

China may soon be getting its hands on one of Russia&#8217;s core fighter jets, the Su-35. The purchase will bring China as close as it can get to challenging America&#8217;s modern air fleet.

Talks are ongoing, and &#8220;The signing will most likely take place next year,&#8221; Viktor Komardin, deputy-chief of Russia&#8217;s Rosoboronexport state-run arms exporter, told state-run Ria Novosti.

China&#8217;s push for the Su-35 tells something about the capabilities of its air force and the regime&#8217;s struggles to manufacture state-of-the-art equipment. The need for the Russian fighter is part of a trend seen in China&#8217;s military, which still relies heavily on foreign imports and stolen designs.

With this purchase, history is repeating itself. In the 1980s China began developing its J-10 fighter jet. It put a prototype in the air in the 1990s, yet, after facing frequent setbacks, China turned to Russia. In 1992, China purchased 50 Russian Su-27s, and since then has turned to Russia to fill orders for fighter jets and jet fighter/bombers.

According to Global Security, &#8220;The acquisition of Su-27, after China had attempted for years to develop the J-10 aircraft with equivalent technology to perform similar functions, demonstrates a lack of confidence in domestic industrial capabilities.&#8221;

Not until late 2006 did China complete its J-10, but even so the plane relies on Russian parts&#8212;particularly its engines.

In developing its fifth-generation fighter jet, the J-20, China again ran into problems. Facing frequent setbacks, it has again turned to the Russia for the next best thing, this time the Su-35.

Fighter jets are categorized by generation. The Su-35 was one of Russia&#8217;s last fighters in the fourth-generation (classified as the 4.5-generation).

Yet the world is now moving toward fifth-generation fighter jets. America has the F-35 and F-22, Russia has the T-50, and China has the J-20. The United States has also made its F-35 fighter available to its allies.

The Russian Su-35 is arguably one of few 4.5-generation fighter jets that can challenge the American F-35. The two planes have similar capabilities, although defense analysts have pointed out that the F-35&#8217;s key to victory is its advanced stealth.

While China has done all it can to promote the J-20, an expected completion date of sometime between 2017 and 2020 suggests the project is now just for show. By 2020, the United States is expected to be well into the development of its next-generation of fighter jets.

The most fundamental problem is that China is not capable of building engines for a fifth-generation fighter jet. It imports AL-31FN engines from Russia, and even its attempts to counterfeit the Russian engines have turned up dry.

In 2010, China announced it would begin manufacturing the engines itself, using its knock-off version of the Russian engine, the WS-10A, according to the StrategyPage website. Yet, just a year later it quietly renewed its orders for the Russian engines.

Chinese officials even publicly called out the regime&#8217;s state-owned aviation company, Aviation Industry Corporation of China. StrategyPage states that in China, &#8220;The public debate points to the continued inability to even achieve the lower (than in the West) manufacturing standards of Russia, whose state-run firms (during the Soviet period) were also never able to match Western standards.&#8221;

Even the J-20, itself, is suspected to be a knock-off of the defunct Russian MiG-1.44. Cross-comparisons between the J-20 and the MiG-1.44 show the designs are very similar.

An unnamed Russian Ministry of Defense official told Reuters in 2011 that it appeared the Chinese gained access to documents related to the jet. An independent analyst also told Reuters &#8220;China bought the technology for parts, including the tail of the Mikoyan, for money.&#8221;

Russian plane manufacturer MiG denied it transferred technology to the Chinese, according to Ria Novosti. Yet, Douglas Barrie, an air warfare specialist at the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies told Ria, &#8220;If it&#8217;s a coincidence, it&#8217;s a striking one. Russia may have provided technical support, but there is nothing substantial to prove that. China has however relied on Russia for much of its defense procurement for a decade and a half.&#8221;

Despite the regime&#8217;s claims about the J-20&#8217;s advanced stealth features, Chinese stealth capabilities are questionable.

China incorporated stealth features into the MiG-1.44 design, and there are varying reports on where it received its stealth technology. Some point to cyberespionage on the F-22 program, some toward cyberespoinage or purchases from the Russians, and some toward an American stealth F-117 Nighthawk that was shot down over Serbia in 1999.

A key problem for the J-20 is that while the MiG-1.44 was a stealth fighter, it was designed for earlier generations of stealth technology.

Advanced stealth features go beyond mere design. A complex coating that can absorb radar is required, as well several other features including technology to hide energy emissions, reduce turbulence, and lower heat radiation.

David Axe, an American military correspondent, also notes on his &#8220;War is Boring&#8221; blog that the J-20 apparently lacks stealth nozzles to evade radar detection from behind. He also notes that it uses &#8220;canards,&#8221; which are small moving wings often used as &#8220;bolt-on&#8221; fixes that &#8220;add radar-reflecting edges.&#8221;

&#8220;The [People&#8217;s Republic of China] with respect to stealth capability, they are behind us, but they will develop and they will get better, and we certainly can&#8217;t rest on our position,&#8221; Air Force Gen. Herbert Carlisle, commander of U.S. Pacific Air Forces, said in 2012, according to DefenseTech.

Perhaps because China relies for its most advanced technology on foreign imports and on stealing designs from other countries, its own research and development in fighter planes has been unsuccessful. This seems to be the lesson of the J-20.

China Leans on Russia for Fighter Jet Technology » The Epoch Times


----------



## cnleio

Can we talk about T50, not Su35 again ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## drunken-monke

cnleio said:


> Can we talk about T50, not Su35 again ?



We can Discuss about T50 in its thread.. Can we have a word from our Chinese forum mates about the new posted by two sources.... @ChineseDragon can you give your valuable inputs...


----------



## Fsjal

This is old news. I'm not sure if China will buy the Su, but if they do, they should use it as an OPFOR plane, just like US Navy Fighter Weapons School or Israeli 115 Squadron. 

This could help train PLAAF pilots and prepare them for dogfight.


----------



## GR!FF!N

Russia and China are moving closer to concluding an agreement whereby Moscow would sell Beijing advanced 4++ generation multirole fighter jets, a senior official from Russias state-run defense industry told media outlets over the weekend.

Viktor Komardin, deputy head of the state-run Rosoboronexport, which is in charge of regulating defense imports and exports, told RIA Novosti on Saturday that negotiations for the sale of Russian Su-35 fighter jets to China are ongoing, and an agreement was likely to be reached sometime in 2014.

Talks are ongoing, but the deal is unlikely to be sealed before the years end. The signing will most likely take place next year, Viktor Komardin said.

The report noted that Komardin did not discuss how many fighter jets China was interested in purchasing, but did say that negotiations included Beijing purchasing ordnance for the advanced, highly maneuverable aircraft.

RIA Novosti also reported that the head of Rosoboronexport recently told Chinese pilots that they would soon have the opportunity to fly the Su-35s.

Moscow and Beijing began negotiating the sale of Su-35s in 2010, but progress was slow and talks were temporarily suspended last year over Russian concerns that China would reverse engineer the planes engines and passive electronically scanned array (PESA) radar systems, according to The Taipei Times.

China has a long history of developing local variants of Russian military systems it purchases from Moscow. Chinas Shenyang J-11B, for example, is believed to be based on the Sukhoi Su-27SK fighter jet. This in part led Russia to drastically reduce the amount and sophistication of its arm sales to China for many years. However, recent years have seen a sharp uptick in Moscows defense exports to Beijing.

Ahead of Xi Jinpings trip to Russia in March, Chinas state-run media reported that the two sides had concluded one of their largest defense deals in over a decade when China agreed to purchase 24 Su-35 jet fighters from Russia and jointly develop four Lada Class air-independent propulsion submarines, which China would then purchase.

However, Russia immediately denied that such an agreement had been reached and even claimed that arms sales would not be discussed by Xi and Russian President Vladimir Putin during the visit. This created confusion on the state of the talks and called into question whether Russia was even still interested in selling China the Su-35s. The recent comments by Rosoboronexport officials clarify that Russia is still indeed interested in selling China the jets. Now, it is merely a question of whether the two sides can come to terms on the specifics of an agreement.

Assuming they can, the Su-35 multirole fighter jets should greatly enhance Chinas air capabilities. Although the Su-35 is derived from the Su-27 fighters that China already has bought and copied, it comes with significant improvements, leading Russia to refer to it as a 4++ generation aircraft.

According to Air Force Technology, the Su-35 has high manoeuvrability (+9g) with a high angle of attack, and is equipped with high-capability weapon systems that contribute to the new aircraft's exceptional dogfighting capability. The maximum level speed is 2,390km/h or Mach 2.25.

Air Force Technology also reports that the Su-35 is capable of carrying numerous air-to-air, air-to-surface and anti-ship missiles. It also says the airplane can be armed with various guided bombs, and that its sensors can detect and track up to 30 airborne targets with a radar cross section (RCS) of 3m² at ranges of 400km using track-while-scan mode.

The same source notes that the aircraft are "powered by two Sturn / UFA AL-31F 117S turbofan engines with thrust-vectoring nozzle control, each supplying 86.3kN thrust or 142.2kN with afterburn."

Here's a video from Russia Today (RT) of the Su-35 "rocking" the Paris Air Show this year. The descripton of the video says that "the Su-35 has been dubbed the 'UFO' for its outstanding maneuverability.



Russia to Sell China Su-35 Multirole Fighter Jets | Flashpoints | The Diplomat

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Agent_47

In the near-term Russia and China will sign a contract for delivery of fourth-generation Su-35 fighters, RIA Novosti reports with reference to the ex-Commander-in-Chief of Russian air forces, Director of Military Aviation Programs Directorate of United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), Vladimir Mikhailov.

"The jets are competitive. We will sign the contract for delivery of Su-35 fighters to China soon and other customers are also interested in this aircraft", — Mikhailov said at RSN radio station.

We remind you that the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation reported earlier that negotiations on the matter between Russia and China are in progress, but no details related to the contract were unveiled.

Speaking of cooperation with foreign countries in terms of deliveries of the latest combat aircraft, Mikhailov added that Russia and India have plans for joint development of a fifth-generation aircraft.

Su-35 is the Russian super-maneuverable multi-role “4++”-generation fighter developed by Sukhoi design bureau; it was derived from T-10S platform

Russia will sign a contract with China for delivery of Su-35 fighters soon - News - Russian Aviation - RUAVIATION.COM


----------



## Screambowl

Russia should target europe for the more business, but any how the relations are not well and Russia should push towards better relations, to build more influence.


----------



## Rajpute

now its important for russia to seek allies in east as the europe is turning hostile towards russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

Its been talking for 7 years and yet to happen. The Russian always say soon. Maybe 10 years after now they still talk about this deal soon....

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Superboy

At the moment, Russia needs to beef up its own Su-35 fleet. Russia needs at least 200 Su-35s ASAP. I don't think China will sign an order for Su-35, not because it's not a good plane, but because Russia needs to concentrate production of Su-35 for the Russian air force rather than export them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Globenim

Certainly this fake report will be true, after the 1.243th bi weekly double and tripple featured "reports" about SU-35 sales to China spammed into the Chinese defence forum for 7 years by mererly coincidentally 99.9% Indians.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## spectribution

Russian Fighters for China Still On Hold | Defense News | defensenews.com

I think it is like Rafale deal. Send mixed signals. Confuse everyone. Force India to upgrade SU 30 MKI to Super Sukhoi or SU 35S MKI.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakistanisage

Good deal for China...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Obambam

We should sticky this thread so we can keep all SU-35 and China related posts in one thread, since we have countless similar threads over the years lol

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Beidou2020

7 years ago people said thesis me thing


----------



## xunzi

Not again.


----------



## UFO77

The matter like LCA exports, are nonsense!


----------



## Globenim

Obambam said:


> We should sticky this thread so we can keep all SU-35 and China related posts in one thread, since we have countless similar threads over the years lol



And please a warning followed by infractions for everyone continues to spam it. Because without infractions our dear neighbours would "miss" the sticky, just like they "missed" all the thousand previous fake reports.


----------



## GCTom

We will know this is true when there are SU-35 in China with chinese jet color flying with chinese air force insignia. until then, it is just another baseless rumor.


----------



## UKBengali

There is no logical reason for China to buy SU-35.

China has better airframe, radar/electronics and in a few years time better engine technology than what would be in the SU-35.

It is annoying that these Russians keep repeating this rubbish time and time again. One reason seems to be that they feel the most threatened by the advancement of Chinese military technology and trying to rubbish it this way.


----------



## tranquilium

This supposed "Su-35 sales to China" is like menstruation. It comes monthly and is bloody annoying.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## shuntmaster

China is already working on 5th generation fighters and has been manufacturing 4.5th gen fighters for years. Why would it want to import 4th gen fighters?


----------



## Beast

So zhuhai 214 airshow is over. May I know the nonsense deal of China buying Su-35 is still going on? It will be the last chance for this rumour to materialize before J-10B enter service and J-20 enter limited production with entering service in 2015-2016.


----------



## conworldus

The only potential deal I see is that Russia will likely end up buying J-31 to power their carrier fleet. Russia has no fifth gen carrier capable jet program. The F-35 is out of question.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MohitV

conworldus said:


> The only potential deal I see is that Russia will likely end up buying J-31 to power their carrier fleet. Russia has no fifth gen carrier capable jet program. The F-35 is out of question.


* and then suddenly a pak-fa appears in the sky...followed by a 5th gen mig*


----------



## conworldus

MohitV said:


> * and then suddenly a pak-fa appears in the sky...followed by a 5th gen mig*


there is no fifth gen mig and the T-50 is too big for carriers. J-31 is Russia's logical choice if it ever wants a medium sized fifth gen fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MohitV

conworldus said:


> there is no fifth gen mig and the T-50 is too big for carriers. J-31 is Russia's logical choice if it ever wants a medium sized fifth gen fighter.


Mikoyan LMFS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

yeah well if the current situation prevails...or escalates....it would be logical to get J31 than to wait for LMFS or pak-fa....russians have gone too slow on advanced tech. productions now-a-days


----------



## conworldus

MohitV said:


> Mikoyan LMFS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> yeah well if the current situation prevails...or escalates....it would be logical to get J31 than to wait for LMFS or pak-fa....russians have gone too slow on advanced tech. productions now-a-days



It is just the choice that makes most economic sense for Russia. Developing the LMFS will take years and billions, and by the time it flies, the J-31 would have taken up all the potential clients who can't buy the F-35. I can see Russia undertaking a joint program on the J-31 though. China won't mind because it is an export fighter anyway.


----------



## Chromatin

shuntmaster said:


> China is already working on 5th generation fighters and has been manufacturing 4.5th gen fighters for years. Why would it want to import 4th gen fighters?


Fifth generation Scare crow to frighten neighbors. Su35 to just add more of the same. Only USA makes the real stealth fighter.


----------



## 帅的一匹

Chromatin said:


> Fifth generation Scare crow to frighten neighbors. Su35 to just add


Nehru thought exactly same as you are, and he got face palmed in 1962. To be honest, indians are not a nationality suitable for battle, you are more good at hyper. Every time when China play some serious with India, you guys crying like a baby.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 帅的一匹

Russia will sign a contract with China for delivery two squadrons of J31 stealthy fighter to fill the stopgap.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Chromatin

wanglaokan said:


> Nehru thought exactly same as you are, and he got face palmed in 1962. To be honest, indians are not a nationality suitable for battle, you are more good at hyper. Every time when China play some serious with India, you guys crying like a baby.


Yes, Indians are not crooked, cunning and mean like your people are. Thus you are well suited for this world. But India is not a homogeneous country like yours. We have groups of people who are more suited in writing poetry than firing guns, we have groups of people who are great in writing software but not half as cunning as a Chinese; then we have Gurkhas, Jats, Rajputs, Sikhs etc, who are greatest warriors in the world. Ask your friend Pakistan! Your leader Mao Tse Tung was a crook who made peace deals with Nehru and back stabbed him by attacking. Indian soldiers fought with rusted guns and yes, India learned its lesson. That is why Modi is buying Rafales and missiles and getting ready for you. We will freeTibet and kick your behind one of these days. We do not plan to let you sleep in peace. Guaranteed. Most of India feels the way I do. We have to settle the score with you.


----------



## Beast

Chromatin said:


> Yes, Indians are not crooked, cunning and mean like your people are. Thus you are well suited for this world. But India is not homogeneous country like yours. We have groups of people who are more suited in writing poetry than firing guns, we have groups of people who are great in writing software but not half as cunning as a Chinese; then we have Gurkhas, Jats, Rajputs, Sikhs etc, who are greatest warriors in the world. Ask your friend Pakistan! Your leader Mao Tse Tung was a crook who made peace deals with Nehru and back stabbed him by attacking. Indian soldiers fought with rusted guns and yes, India learned its lesson. That is why Modi is buying Rafales and missiles and getting ready for you. We will freeTibet and kick your behind one of these days. We do not plan to let you sleep in peace. Guaranteed. Most of India feels the way I do. We have to settle the score with you.



Let see who is the crook. a big slap on you. 

It wasn't China, but Nehru who declared 1962 war: Australian journalist Neville Maxwell - TOI Mobile | The Times of India Mobile Site

Chinese is never like indian who besides bragging and making up stories, do nothing good. Chinese work hard and reach their goal. That is why today China is world economy number 2 and india? I am not sure it's 8th or 9th , lagging far behind China.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## siegecrossbow

Screambowl said:


> Russia should target europe for the more business, but any how the relations are not well and Russia should push towards better relations, to build more influence.



Just a bit of a "lol" in hindsight.


----------



## 帅的一匹

Chromatin said:


> Yes, Indians are not crooked, cunning and mean like your people are. Thus you are well suited for this world. But India is not a homogeneous country like yours. We have groups of people who are more suited in writing poetry than firing guns, we have groups of people who are great in writing software but not half as cunning as a Chinese; then we have Gurkhas, Jats, Rajputs, Sikhs etc, who are greatest warriors in the world. Ask your friend Pakistan! Your leader Mao Tse Tung was a crook who made peace deals with Nehru and back stabbed him by attacking. Indian soldiers fought with rusted guns and yes, India learned its lesson. That is why Modi is buying Rafales and missiles and getting ready for you. We will freeTibet and kick your behind one of these days. We do not plan to let you sleep in peace. Guaranteed. Most of India feels the way I do. We have to settle the score with you.


Pakistanis and bangladeshis has the saying what Indians really are, bully against weak and soft to the stronger.Bangladeshi kid beated to death by BSF | Page 5


----------



## 帅的一匹

Russia ask China to increase the purchase number of SU35 from 24 to 48 pops, the negotation is stuck right now.


----------



## Beast

wanglaokan said:


> Russia ask China to increase the purchase number of SU35 from 24 to 48 pops, the negotation is stuck right now.


The Chinese just play along with Russian. It will never become fruitful.


----------



## 帅的一匹

Beast said:


> The Chinese just play along with Russian. It will never become fruitful.


waste time......


----------



## rcrmj

the negotiation is real, and for many years now, but we do not have the urgency to buy Su-35, not for those nonsensical assumptions about outdated Radar and 117S engine
for the former, we are at least generation ahead of Russia, and for the latter, never head turbofan engine is up for a quik copy

more the talks linger less it will come to a fruit


----------



## Beast

rcrmj said:


> the negotiation is real, and for many years now, but we do not have the urgency to buy Su-35, not for those nonsensical assumptions about outdated Radar and 117S engine
> for the former, we are at least generation ahead of Russia, and for the latter, never head turbofan engine is up for a quik copy
> 
> more the talks linger less it will come to a fruit


It maybe real but the idea is Chinese never have the real intention to buy their su-35.


----------



## rcrmj

Beast said:


> It maybe real but the idea is Chinese never have the real intention to buy their su-35.


we do have, the talks have been long, but we cannot look at this issue as a stagnant event, the intention and needs from respective side correlate with many other factors, for example, especially the rapid development of China technological capability, and the speed of surpassing Russia in most fields, ``` ``so the longer the talks are, the less likelihood for the deal to come through


----------



## Beast

rcrmj said:


> we do have, the talks have been long, but we cannot look at this issue as a stagnant event, the intention and needs from respective side correlate with many other factors, for example, especially the rapid development of China technological capability, and the speed of surpassing Russia in most fields, ``` ``so the longer the talks are, the less likelihood for the deal to come through


You might be true in some sense. The PLAAF are using this Su-35 as backup. Chinese always love a plan B. But as you say, China advance very well and better than expected. Plan B is not needed now.

Remember , the low grade atomic clock we bought from Switzerland which the western though we are going to install on our beidou 2 GPS?

End up it just an backup compare to the more superior one we made for our beidou 2.


----------



## 李明皿

China is catching up Russia ,


----------



## BoQ77

China continues to buy Russia 4th gen aircrafts.


----------



## GeHAC

BoQ77 said:


> China continues to buy Russia 4th gen aircrafts.


Buddy,we are buying Komsomolsk's capacity.Benifit for both airforce expansion.
It has been at ten years since we bought Russian jets last time.Just show our support to Russia at the frontline.


----------



## BoQ77

GeHAC said:


> Buddy,we are buying Komsomolsk's capacity.Benifit for both airforce expansion.
> It has been at ten years since we bought Russian jets last time.Just show our support to Russia at the frontline.



ten years and hundreds of jet engines accordingly. that's Russian support to China weak ability in manufacturing engines.


----------



## Ultima Thule

BoQ77 said:


> ten years and hundreds of jet engines accordingly. that's Russian support to China weak ability in manufacturing engines.


indeed china is weak in engine technology today but within the 5 to 10 year way ahead of russia and comparable to US and Europe


----------



## Ultima Thule

Chromatin said:


> china is a country that specializes in bribing and blackmail. What you do is steal from others like USA, copy without permission, and produce cheap junk like your J31. You are the labor camp of America and exploit your poor. That is the way you became rich. China is a country of slaves run by communist bosses.. India is a free country where every voice counts where people are free to express their opinion and change the government if they don't like. You eat stale cold noodle and work like a slave. China is the problem for all its neighbors.


your too much cumming to your asshole


----------



## GeHAC

BoQ77 said:


> ten years and hundreds of jet engines accordingly. that's Russian support to China weak ability in manufacturing engines.


Yes it's true that our engine manufacturing ability lag a lot because of twenty years of low military expenditure.Engines are the crown of industry which needs years of continuing investment and manufacturing experience.Also we are suffering from the blockade.But at least we have domestic backup choices.Newly produced flankers since 2012 were all fitted with WS-10A(the adaptability problem solved).And we are also benefit from the WS-10 core engine.Also,WS -15 is coming out soon.


----------



## rcrmj

Chromatin said:


> china is a country that specializes in bribing and blackmail. What you do is steal from others like USA, copy without permission, and produce cheap junk like your J31. You are the labor camp of America and exploit your poor. That is the way you became rich. China is a country of slaves run by communist bosses.. India is a free country where every voice counts where people are free to express their opinion and change the government if they don't like. You eat stale cold noodle and work like a slave. China is the problem for all its neighbors.


did you just come out the open toilet?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Screambowl

siegecrossbow said:


> Just a bit of a "lol" in hindsight.


good for your blood pressure which went high on reading my post


----------



## siegecrossbow

Screambowl said:


> good for your blood pressure which went high on reading my post


My blood pressure didn't rise. I just thought it was funny how Russian military intervention in Ukraine occurred a month after your post.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 李明皿

BoQ77 said:


> China continues to buy Russia
> 
> 
> BoQ77 said:
> 
> 
> 
> China continues to buy Russia 4th gen aircrafts.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it is ,we continue to buy air crafts,it is wrong what I said ,the right opinion is China had catched Russia . the only two productions Russia can imply are weapons and resource ,but China have almost everything even US cant compare
Click to expand...


----------



## Beast

BoQ77 said:


> ten years and hundreds of jet engines accordingly. that's Russian support to China weak ability in manufacturing engines.


What about Vietnam? May I know? What jet engine can vietnam make? I am very interested to know? Care to enlightened me? Or Vietnam is just like India use money to buy to prove they are below one step than China?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Keel

Regardless of the closer China-Russia relationship and Russia's great want of cash, I think it is pure wishful thinking for Russia to sell its best operating fighter jets any time soon to China albeit a modified version of Su-35 as expected when T-50 is not even inducted now.


----------



## Screambowl

siegecrossbow said:


> My blood pressure didn't rise. I just thought it was funny how Russian military intervention in Ukraine occurred a month after your post.


I told you Russia will do it and done! Russia always has been investing as oil in EU, they started with Ukraine and g little further.


----------



## Beast

Keel said:


> Regardless of the closer China-Russia relationship and Russia's great want of cash, I think it is pure wishful thinking for Russia to sell its best operating fighter jets any time soon to China albeit a modified version of Su-35 as expected when T-50 is not even inducted now.


The problem is China don't even think she needs one even Russia decide to export its best. Does Russian best equal surpassing China best? 10 years ago, yes. Now, hardly.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## terranMarine

Who knows in the future Russia might want to consider buying warships from China as the French has already proven to be unreliable for delivering the promised ship to Russia due to the pressure.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

terranMarine said:


> Who knows in the future Russia might want to consider buying warships from China as the French has already proven to be unreliable for delivering the promised ship to Russia due to the pressure.


It will trust me. The Russian has so many plans but little invest in R&D. The only way to quickly equip themselves naval modernization is to buy China naval product.
If Russian buy 2 LDP 071. I don't mind China buy 48 Su-35.


----------



## siegecrossbow

Screambowl said:


> I told you Russia will do it and done! Russia always has been investing as oil in EU, they started with Ukraine and g little further.



Not to go off topic but how exactly does war with Ukraine improve Russia's standing with Europe?


----------



## Keel

Beast said:


> The problem is China don't even think she needs one even Russia decide to export its best. Does Russian best equal surpassing China best? 10 years ago, yes. Now, hardly.



Thanks for reinforcing my point @# 50 because my observation is Russia has no urge to sell, while yours is China does not have the need to buy. There wont be a deal in the presence of either one of the conditions let alone both. So in its fourth page of discussion now, and probably some more on other threads, any more discussion on the subject is a waste of time


----------



## Beast

siegecrossbow said:


> Not to go off topic but how exactly does war with Ukraine improve Russia's standing with Europe?



He is suggesting Russia invest in Europe by force of slowly swallowing it's Europe counterpart.


----------



## siegecrossbow

Beast said:


> He is suggesting Russia invest in Europe by force of slowly swallowing it's Europe counterpart.



That's hardly going to improve relations.


----------



## Screambowl

siegecrossbow said:


> Not to go off topic but how exactly does war with Ukraine improve Russia's standing with Europe?


it does not, it just tells EU not Europe that be European and not to promote american interest in the region. Oil in Ukraine is the basic cause of the conflict, It is under Russian economic zone and US presence is just irritating them.


----------



## tahir195

_The PLAAF has a growing fighter fleet, but it needs help on one critical component_

Last April, Chinese airplane manufacturer Shenyang Aircraft Corporation surprised military observers by test flying its new J-11D fighter jet, an upgraded version of the J-11, China’s indigenous copy of the Russian Su-27. The D-model J-11 is believed to include such advanced features as an active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, a relocated infrared search and track (IRST) system, and the expanded use of composite materials to reduce the plane’s weight and radar signature. This first flight indicates that the J-11D is further along in its development cycle than many experts predicted and is poised to provide a new and deadly addition to the growing fighter fleet of the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF).







Despite the evident maturity of the J-11D program, the Chinese military nevertheless appears to also be going ahead with plans to purchase Russian Su-35 Flankers. The Su-35 is far more maneuverable than the J-11 – which gives the Russian jet an advantage in short-range dogfights – can fly longer distances, and can take off and land with a larger payload. It is also equipped with new avionics and new cockpit displays. However, its radar is a less advanced passive electronically scanned array (PESA) than the AESA system on the J-11D. Moreover, the aircraft and its systems will be manufactured abroad. The Chinese government views its indigenous defense industry as a strategic asset; purchasing more planes from Russia will not help advance Beijing’s goal of developing a mature, self-reliant aerospace industry. Given the apparent redundancy of moving forward with two very similar aircraft programs, some analysts speculate that the PLAAF’s primary motivation for buying the Su-35 may not be for its value as a weapons system but rather because it is equipped with advanced AL-117S turbofans.

Engines are a critically important component of any fighter aircraft, and they present Chinese airplane manufacturers with a dilemma. Their new fifth-generation fighter prototypes, the Chengdu J-20 and Shenyang J-31, sport sophisticated airframes and avionics that are clearly intended to make them a match for the United States’ most advanced aircraft. However, China’s ability to manufacture jet engines has not kept pace with other sectors of its aerospace industry. Regardless of how capable other Chinese aircraft systems may be, without a reliable, high-performance turbofan engine to power them, both the J-20 and the J-31 will be crippled.






History is replete with examples of otherwise excellent jets that struggled because they were underpowered. Although the iconic P-51 Mustang is now best remembered for its sterling service escorting strategic bombers on missions over Germany, it was only after engineers replaced its original Allison engine with the much more powerful British Merlin that it could fly and fight at the altitudes necessary to keep station with the bombers it was protecting. Early models of the now-legendary F-14 Tomcat were equipped with turbofans so weak that Secretary of the Navy John Lehman blamed them for nearly 30 percent of all Tomcat crashes and described them as being “just…terrible.” The F-15 Eagle and F-22 Raptor both struggled through long, painful development programs before their massive engines finally matured and turned them into the highly maneuverable dog fighters that they are today.

The Chinese military has traditionally relied on Russian engines to power its jets. Unfortunately for the PLAAF, the foreign models it is currently using are no longer cutting edge. The designs of these fighter engines date back more than 30 years and they were intended to be used in aircraft that are much lighter than the new models being tested today. For the time being, prototypes of both the J-20 and the J-31 are flying with older Russian turbofans – the J-20 with the Saturn AL-31 and the J-31 with the Klimov RD-93. Analysts have speculated that both of these aircraft are facing performance limitations imposed by their vintage power plants. For example, the J-20’s current reliance on AL-31s may be preventing the aircraft from achieving supercruise, one of the key performance characteristics that makes the U.S. F-22 such a capable fighter.

China’s airplane manufacturers have two options for acquiring more advanced engines: Buy them from the Russians or build them at home. Beijing’s clear preference is for the latter; engines have become a focal point of the PRC’s aerospace industry. One Russian commentator described domestic engine development as being as strategically important for the Chinese as the Apollo space program was for the United States during the 1960s. However, jet engines are notoriously difficult to develop, and pose unique design challenges due to the extreme forces they encounter during flight and the exotic materials and techniques used in their construction. In 2012, Andrew Erickson and Gabe Collins argued that engine manufacturing remained a “persistent Achilles heel” of the Chinese aircraft industry and one that lagged behind rapid progress in other aerospace sectors, such as airframe design and sensors.

Today, the most advanced Chinese-made military turbofan in operational use is the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (Avic) WS-10. The WS-10 provides power for many Chinese aircraft, including some of the PLAAF’s J-11 fleet and the new J-16 multirole fighter. Reports on its capabilities are mixed at best. Although many of the engine’s initial teething problems have apparently been overcome, Jane’s reported last September that the WS-10 still suffers from so many faults that the “number [of engines] sent back to the…plant exceeds the amount of new production units.” Some Chinese commentators have also speculated that the WS-10 lacks sufficient power for the J-16, which is heavier than other Chinese Su-27 variants, and will need to be upgraded to allow the new plane to meet its design potential.

Another clue pointing to potential problems with the WS-10 is the decision by the PLAAF to use the AL-31 to power the newest variant of the J-10 attack fighter, the J-10B. Although a prototype J-10B equipped with a WS-10 was seen flying as far back as 2011, the PLAAF has nevertheless decided to go forward with the AL-31 for the production version instead. This decision may indicate that the Chinese military is concerned about the WS-10’s capabilities and is opting for a tried-and-true Russian alternative.

Regardless of the WS-10’s current capabilities, the fifth generation J-20 and J-31 will need much more powerful and reliable engines if they are to maximize their performance. An upgraded WS-10 is one option for the J-20, but it would almost certainly still leave the aircraft underpowered for its size and weight. Two entirely new Chinese engines are currently in development: the Xian WS-15 for the J-20 and the Avic WS-13 for the J-31. The progress of the WS-15 is unknown and it is not being flown on J-20 prototypes, although one Chinese blogger recently suggested that positive test results may indicate an unexpected leap in progress for the engine. The WS-13 was displayed at the Zhuhai air show last November along with another afterburning turbofan, but according to Bill Sweetman “the identical engines were on show two years ago,” and the “the [WS-13’s] development pace so far contrasts sharply with the rate at which new missiles and radar systems are being produced.”






The questionable progress of both the WS-13 and WS-15 programs may help to explain China’s interest in the Su-35, the latest and most advanced variant of Russia’s venerable Flanker aircraft family. The Su-35 is powered by the AL-117S, a significantly improved version of the AL-31 also sometimes designated the AL-41.

With its domestic programs seemingly in limbo, some analysts have argued that an AL-117S purchase would be the fastest way for the Chinese to get their hands on a suitable turbofan for the J-20. Since Russia is reportedly unwilling to sell the new engine as a standalone product, the PLAAF will have to buy the Su-35 and acquire the AL-117S as a part of a complete weapons system. After a series of false starts, it seems that a deal for 24 Su-35s is now in its final stages and Chinese pilots have already begun training on the new aircraft in anticipation of the first delivery in 2016.

In the long-run, it would be foolish to bet against the Chinese aerospace industry ultimately achieving the capacity to develop competitive high-performance jet engines. In the near term, however, the AL-117S remains China’s best option for powering the J-20. Although resorting to Russian technology may not be the ideal solution from an indigenous manufacturing standpoint, lessons learned from the AL-117S will undoubtedly be incorporated into the WS-13 and WS-15. That may benefit the J-31, which will be stuck with older WS-10s or RD-93s until the WS-13 comes on line.

For the PLAAF, purchasing the Su-35 is a win-win. They will not only get a highly capable new aircraft, they will also acquire get an engine that has the power to make their sophisticated new J-20 a world-class fighter.

Source: http://thediplomat.com/2015/06/why-chin ... the-su-35/

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

The diplomat? 

Isn't the same one talking about PLA consists of mostly WWII vintage military ware?

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## A2Z

If China fails to develop WS-13 and continues to use RD-93 like JF-17, will Russians allow the sales of jets that use their engines and compete with Russian jets in the market?


----------



## Beast

A2Z said:


> If China fails to develop WS-13 and continues to use RD-93 like JF-17, will Russians allow the sales of jets that use their engines and compete with Russian jets in the market?


Yes, it will. It's not about re export of the engine. Basically there is no buyer in the first place.


----------



## A2Z

Beast said:


> Yes, it will. It's not about re export of the engine. Basically there is no buyer in the first place.


So you are saying that Russians wont raise an issue if J-31 powered by RD-93 is sold to Pakistan? Moreover I have even read that the reason why PAF has delayed the purchase of J-10B is because Russian don't want their engines in Pakistan's hands, may be due to Indian pressure.


----------



## AMDR

Why go foreign when you can go homegrown? J-11D is definitely within the same performance area of an 
Su-35S.

Plus the Su-35 has a PESA while the J-11D has an AESA. The obvious choice is the AESA.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Sasquatch

AMDR said:


> Why go foreign when you can go homegrown? J-11D is definitely within the same performance area of an
> Su-35S.
> 
> Plus the Su-35 has a PESA while the J-11D has an AESA. The obvious choice is the AESA.



Constant hype about the 117 turbofans, China may have previously wanted the Su-35 prior to 2009 but now no, can't link with our domestic AWACS or missiles. More cons than pros, WS-10 with TVC is coming and the first engines by insider sources confirm the J-20 will use the WS-10.

I wouldn't also take the diplomat seriously most people writing these articles have no clue, exp:
Is China Eyeing These Advanced French Amphibious Assault Ships? | The Diplomat

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## tahir195

A2Z said:


> If China fails to develop WS-13 and continues to use RD-93 like JF-17, will Russians allow the sales of jets that use their engines and compete with Russian jets in the market?


it depends on Buyer



Hu Songshan said:


> Constant hype about the 117 turbofans, China may have previously wanted the Su-35 prior to 2009 but now no, can't link with our domestic AWACS or missiles. More cons than pros, WS-10 with TVC is coming and the first engines by insider sources confirm the J-20 will use the WS-10.
> 
> I wouldn't also take the diplomat seriously most people writing these articles have no clue, exp:
> Is China Eyeing These Advanced French Amphibious Assault Ships? | The Diplomat


i heard that WS-15 will Powered the J-20


----------



## A2Z

AMDR said:


> Why go foreign when you can go homegrown? J-11D is definitely within the same performance area of an
> Su-35S.
> 
> Plus the Su-35 has a PESA while the J-11D has an AESA. The obvious choice is the AESA.


I think you didn't read the article properly its the engine that is the cause of attraction, which Russia isn't offering without the jet.


----------



## Beast

A2Z said:


> So you are saying that Russians wont raise an issue if J-31 powered by RD-93 is sold to Pakistan? Moreover I have even read that the reason why PAF has delayed the purchase of J-10B is because Russian don't want their engines in Pakistan's hands, may be due to Indian pressure.


Why until now you still believe Indian has leverage on Russian political decision. Let me ask you a basic fact, How did JF-17 got the RD-93 engine from Russian in the first place? China has a bigger political influence on Russian than Indian. It is solely on China account that Russian agree to sell RD-93 engine for JF-17. Even Singh who attempt to lobby for blocking of the RD-93 engine got bluntly rejected by Putin when he personally visited Russia in the 2008.

As for J-31, RD-93 can never satisfy J-31 engine. RD-93 is used just solely to speed up the development process. It will need the Chinese engine when the export model is finalised. And I do not understand why Pakistanis rather believe in western sources who dont even know a single Chinese for information regarding Chinese military development?

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## Pakistanisage

A2Z said:


> *So you are saying that Russians wont raise an issue if J-31 powered by RD-93 is sold to Pakistan? Moreover I have even read that the reason why PAF has delayed the purchase of J-10B is because Russian don't want their engines in Pakistan's hands, may be due to Indian pressure*.




What ? HELLO .....You must be waking up from deep slumber.

Russia has already agreed to sell the Russian engine directly to Pakistan.


IDEAS 2014: Pakistani defence minister says Russia ready to sell RD-93 engine directly to Islamabad - IHS Jane's 360

Why did Russia approve RD 93 engine sale for Pakistan's JF 17? | Indian Defence Forum

Russia ready to sell RD-93 engine directly to Islamabad


----------



## SBD-3

A2Z said:


> So you are saying that Russians wont raise an issue if J-31 powered by RD-93 is sold to Pakistan? Moreover I have even read that the reason why PAF has delayed the purchase of J-10B is because *Russian don't want their engines in Pakistan's hands*, may be due to Indian pressure.


And probably thats why they made an agreement with Pakistan to allow direct export of RD-93?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

This article is 100% not true.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tipu7

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> This article is 100% not true.


how? give counter agreements?


----------



## j20blackdragon

We show the J-20.

The Western media says we need the Su-35.

We show the FC-31.

The Western media says we need the Su-35.

We show J-11D with AESA and domestic engines.

The Western media says we need the Su-35.

My question is very simple: what do we need to do before we DON'T need the Su-35?

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## gambit

j20blackdragon said:


> We show the J-20.
> 
> The Western media says we need the Su-35.
> 
> We show the FC-31.
> 
> The Western media says we need the Su-35.
> 
> We show J-11D with AESA and domestic engines.
> 
> The Western media says we need the Su-35.
> 
> My question is very simple: what do we need to do before we DON'T need the Su-35?


The West said the PLA was a backward military and after Desert Storm where the PLA was embarrassed by its own pathetically flawed opinion of the West, the PLA changed. So what are you complaining about ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Globenim

j20blackdragon said:


> We show the J-20.
> 
> The Western media says we need the Su-35.
> 
> We show the FC-31.
> 
> The Western media says we need the Su-35.
> 
> We show J-11D with AESA and domestic engines.
> 
> The Western media says we need the Su-35.
> 
> My question is very simple: what do we need to do before we DON'T need the Su-35?



In 5 years they will just switch to the next Russian plane. These reports exist obviously because China is making great progress with the engines and the sole purpose it to deny it with contradicting lies. The intend by U.S. state controlled "free" propaganda is obviously mainly to undermine Chinas military industrial complex to make sympathizers wary of buying Chinese arms and downplay Chinas military strength as a means to encourage lackey regimes like Vietnam to act more rebellious and take away the publics fear and unwillingness to support a conflict with a China that could easily bomb smaller foes like Vietnam back to stone age with minimal losses these days. 

It should be obvious why Russians would propagate their products as superior and needed by China.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Beidou2020

gambit said:


> The West said the PLA was a backward military and after Desert Storm where the PLA was embarrassed by its own pathetically flawed opinion of the West, the PLA changed. So what are you complaining about ?



US said China will be easily defeated in the Korean war too. What happened was China took back control of North Korea once China entered the war and made a complete mockery of the overrated US military

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## siegecrossbow

j20blackdragon said:


> We show the J-20.
> 
> The Western media says we need the Su-35.
> 
> We show the FC-31.
> 
> The Western media says we need the Su-35.
> 
> We show J-11D with AESA and domestic engines.
> 
> The Western media says we need the Su-35.
> 
> My question is very simple: what do we need to do before we DON'T need the Su-35?



For J-20 to enter service en-mass.


----------



## IND151

Interesting Article


----------



## S10

Why China does not need Su-35:

1. J-20
2. J-31
3. J-16
4. J-11D
5. WS-10B (14 ton thrust, FADEC)

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Akasa

S10 said:


> Why China does not need Su-35:
> 
> 1. J-20
> 2. J-31
> 3. J-16
> 4. J-11D
> 5. WS-10B (14 ton thrust, FADEC)



It is rumored the J-15S will enter service with an AESA radar, so that would be one more reason.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Speeder 2

What stops US attacking China is not the absence of Su-35, or even J-20, but China's economy and long-range nukes.

As long as the economy is on track and nukes are effective, China doesn't need Su-35, which btw will not be a major deciding factor in a war btw China and the US.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Jlaw

Speeder 2 said:


> What stops US attacking China is not the absence of Su-35, or even J-20, but China's economy and long-range nukes.
> 
> As long as the economy is on track and nukes are effective, China doesn't need Su-35, which btw will not be a major deciding factor in a war btw China and the US.


No it won't but it will make the Indians paranoid, running around shouting "Cheen this, Cheen that.."

that itself is worth the price.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

A2Z said:


> If China fails to develop WS-13 and continues to use RD-93 like JF-17, will Russians allow the sales of jets that use their engines and compete with Russian jets in the market?



J-31 and J-20 are best operated using Saturn AL-41F1 engines rather than RD-93. May be Izdeliye 30 in future.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Globenim

Beidou2020 said:


> US said China will be easily defeated in the Korean war too. What happened was China took back control of North Korea once China entered the war and made a complete mockery of the overrated US military


B-b-but rememer! U.S. lost less soldier than China! That makes China the loser. Never mind Chinas losses came from singlehandedly fighting against a larger army of almost two dozen invading nations and South Korean army at at the same time, while the North Korean army was already in shambles before China entered the war. Never mind Chinas losses have been lower than the combined allied losses unless you want to believe the butthurt U.S. propaganda.
And rember China didn't conquer whole South Korea! Only reset every gain the invading allies made back to point zero and reconquered the whole by the North Koreans lost North. That makes the allies the winner and China the loser!

Finest plumber logic!


----------



## Beidou2020

Speeder 2 said:


> What stops US attacking China is not the absence of Su-35, or even J-20, but China's economy and long-range nukes.
> 
> As long as the economy is on track and nukes are effective, China doesn't need Su-35, which btw will not be a major deciding factor in a war btw China and the US.



What will the PLA do if the US uses their conventional forces to destroy China's nuclear arsenal?
Since China has a no-first-use nuclear policy, China won't be able to use its nuclear weapons since the US didn't use their nuclear weapons.


----------



## UKBengali

Beidou2020 said:


> What will the PLA do if the US uses their conventional forces to destroy China's nuclear arsenal?
> Since China has a no-first-use nuclear policy, China won't be able to use its nuclear weapons since the US didn't use their nuclear weapons.



Not possible as China has a highly survivable nuclear triad.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## j20blackdragon

Beidou2020 said:


> What will the PLA do if the US uses their conventional forces to destroy China's nuclear arsenal?
> Since China has a no-first-use nuclear policy, China won't be able to use its nuclear weapons since the US didn't use their nuclear weapons.



1. 3,000 mile Underground Great Wall.
2. Road-mobile DF-31B and DF-41.
3. DF-5B in hidden silos.
4. How do you know China doesn't have ICBMs hidden in rail cars?
5. 094/096 SSBN

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beidou2020

j20blackdragon said:


> 1. 3,000 mile Underground Great Wall.
> 2. Road-mobile DF-31B and DF-41.
> 3. DF-5B in hidden silos.
> 4. How do you know China doesn't have ICBMs hidden in rail cars?
> 5. 094/096 SSBN



But US could invade China with its conventional military and destroy those nuclear weapons.
Will China retaliate with nukes if the US destroys China's nuclear force with conventional weapons?


----------



## S10

gambit said:


> The West said the PLA was a backward military and after Desert Storm where the PLA was embarrassed by its own pathetically flawed opinion of the West, the PLA changed. So what are you complaining about ?


We all get the wrong idea about potential adversaries sometimes, like how the US got the wrong idea in Korea.


----------



## BigDaddyWatch

Even after the J-16 and the J-11D some people just don't give up.


----------



## Sarjen29

*PLA must pay double Russian Air Force’s price for Su-35 fighter*
Published August 13, 2015 | By admin
SOURCE: WANTCHINA TIMES







China’s People’s Liberation Army Air Force must pay double what the Russian Air Force pays to purchase the country’s Su-35 fighter, a source from Russia’s aviation industry told the Moscow-based Vedomosti in a report published Aug. 11.

A contract for a new batch of Su-35 multirole air superiority fighters for the Russian Air Force will be signed between the Moscow-based United Aircraft Corporation and Russia’s defense ministry at the opening ceremony of the Russian Worldwide Air Show, or MAKS 2015, on Aug. 25. Under the contract, UAC will supply 48 Su-35 fighters to the Russian Air Force before 2020. Sergey Shoigu, the country’s defense minister, ordered that all tests and trials for the plane must be completed before the end of this year.

The total price for the 48 fighters will be US$1.58 billion, sources told the newspaper. Konstantin Makiyenko, an analyst from the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies in Moscow, said this is the largest deal between UAC and the defense ministry this year, since the air force may not purchase additional Su-30SM fighters and Su-34 tactical bombers in near future.

Russia has also approved the sale of 24 Su-35 fighters to China for a reported price of US$1.5 billion. With China apparently made to pay double what the Russian government pays per unit, this may be one of the reasons the two sides have yet to reach an agreement on the terms of the sale.


----------



## walle990

WANTCHINATIMES ...

If news of procuring su-35 were true, China's su-35 fleet would already be 8 years old.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

China with reserves of 2-3 Trillion dollaras does it care about a mere 1 Billion extra payment ??


----------



## Economic superpower

Why get the Su-35 when China has the J-11D?

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Chanakyaa

Economic superpower said:


> Why get the Su-35 when China has the J-11D?



The Point.



AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> China with reserves of 2-3 Trillion dollaras does it care about a mere 1 Billion extra payment ??



Ask this to US who with 1 Trillion Defence Budget afford only 200 F22s.
China needs Engines, Not the Jets.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

XiNiX said:


> The Point.
> 
> 
> 
> Ask this to US who with 1 Trillion Defence Budget afford only 200 F22s.
> China needs Engines, Not the Jets.



Hi, XiNiX, the J-11D reportedly uses the 140 kN upgraded WS-10 engine, which differs from the 117S only in 2 kN of thrust and vectoring, the latter of which is of dubious significance in modern combat.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## cirr

I am not against the purchase of 24 or even more Su-35s for political reasons。

But keeping writing and posting old rehashed one-sided “story” is dead boring。



XiNiX said:


> The Point.
> 
> 
> 
> Ask this to US who with 1 Trillion Defence Budget afford only 200 F22s.
> China needs Engines, Not the Jets.



The S117 is only slightly better in thrust than the WS-10G。

And if you read Chinese，recent *OFFICIAL* reports suggest that China is on the cusp of solving its engine weakness once and for all：

中国近期试飞多款自主研制新型航空发动机 |发动机|中国|战机_新浪军事

Perhaps WantChinaTimes can do us all a favour and translate the above article into English。

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Beast

Sarjen29 said:


> *PLA must pay double Russian Air Force’s price for Su-35 fighter*
> Published August 13, 2015 | By admin
> SOURCE: WANTCHINA TIMES
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> China’s People’s Liberation Army Air Force must pay double what the Russian Air Force pays to purchase the country’s Su-35 fighter, a source from Russia’s aviation industry told the Moscow-based Vedomosti in a report published Aug. 11.
> 
> A contract for a new batch of Su-35 multirole air superiority fighters for the Russian Air Force will be signed between the Moscow-based United Aircraft Corporation and Russia’s defense ministry at the opening ceremony of the Russian Worldwide Air Show, or MAKS 2015, on Aug. 25. Under the contract, UAC will supply 48 Su-35 fighters to the Russian Air Force before 2020. Sergey Shoigu, the country’s defense minister, ordered that all tests and trials for the plane must be completed before the end of this year.
> 
> The total price for the 48 fighters will be US$1.58 billion, sources told the newspaper. Konstantin Makiyenko, an analyst from the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies in Moscow, said this is the largest deal between UAC and the defense ministry this year, since the air force may not purchase additional Su-30SM fighters and Su-34 tactical bombers in near future.
> 
> Russia has also approved the sale of 24 Su-35 fighters to China for a reported price of US$1.5 billion. With China apparently made to pay double what the Russian government pays per unit, this may be one of the reasons the two sides have yet to reach an agreement on the terms of the sale.



Indian is so obsessed with China buying Su-35? Please do not drag us down to your level. We have not bought any Russian military fighter since 2007.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Chanakyaa

SinoSoldier said:


> Hi, XiNiX, the J-11D reportedly uses the 140 kN upgraded WS-10 engine, which differs from the 117S only in 2 kN of thrust and vectoring, the latter of which is of dubious significance in modern combat.



Sir, can you plz compare the performance of the new engine.


----------



## Akasa

XiNiX said:


> Sir, can you plz compare the performance of the new engine.



No raw specifications have been unveiled yet, but the main difference between the two engines (with the tentative knowledge that we have) would be thrust vectoring.


----------



## Chanakyaa

SinoSoldier said:


> No raw specifications have been unveiled yet, but the main difference between the two engines (with the tentative knowledge that we have) would be thrust vectoring.



Great. Thanx fr the reply.


----------



## Akasa

XiNiX said:


> Great. Thanx fr the reply.



No problem!


----------



## Viper0011.

XiNiX said:


> *Ask this to US who with 1 Trillion Defence Budget afford only 200 F22s.
> 
> 
> China needs Engines, Not the Jets*.



1) The F-22 when started was a few generations ahead of its time. A LOT of Tech and R&D had to be don to build it. So every time you go way beyond the current generations technology, mechanics and materials, you'll pay a LOT more. Plus US labor is more expensive too. We don't have 15 yer old kids working for $ 1.00 a day. This isn't to offend anyone, just a true statement. And labor cost impact price a LOT.

2) I can imagine just the Chinese engines flying by themselves, no air frame, or chassis or pilots needed

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

cirr said:


> I am not against the purchase of 24 or even more Su-35s for political reasons。
> 
> But keeping writing and posting old rehashed one-sided “story” is dead boring。
> 
> 
> 
> The S117 is only slightly better in thrust than the WS-10G。
> 
> And if you read Chinese，recent *OFFICIAL* reports suggest that China is on the cusp of solving its engine weakness once and for all：
> 
> 中国近期试飞多款自主研制新型航空发动机 |发动机|中国|战机_新浪军事
> 
> Perhaps WantChinaTimes can do us all a favour and translate the above article into English。



The WS-10B is 137Kn, while the WS-10G is 155kN.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EAsian

Viper0011. said:


> 1) The F-22 when started was a few generations ahead of its time. A LOT of Tech and R&D had to be don to build it. So every time you go way beyond the current generations technology, mechanics and materials, you'll pay a LOT more. Plus US labor is more expensive too. We don't have 15 yer old kids working for $ 1.00 a day. This isn't to offend anyone, just a true statement. And labor cost impact price a LOT.
> 
> 2) I can imagine just the Chinese engines flying by themselves, no air frame, or chassis or pilots needed


Our engines work well，thanks for your concern,Better mind your own business first.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ziaulislam

XiNiX said:


> The Point.
> 
> 
> 
> Ask this to US who with 1 Trillion Defence Budget afford only 200 F22s.
> China needs Engines, Not the Jets.


but they brought 2000 + f-35 for 400 billion dollars!


----------



## AsianLion

*All You Need is Su-35: China Should Buy Russian Fighter Jets – Media*

© AP Photo/ Francois Mori
MILITARY & INTELLIGENCE

*China will have to purchase Sukhoi Su-35 (Flanker-E) supermaneuverable multirole fighter jets despite the fact that Beijing is developing its own fourth generation aircraft, according to the Want China Times website.*

The latest modification of the Chinese fighter jet, the Shenyang J-11D, conducted its maiden flight last week. The J-11D, manufactured by the Shenyang Aircraft Corporation, is based on the Russian Sukhoi Su-27 jet. The Su-35 is also an upgraded version of the Su-27.

"The Su-35 has an internal fuel capacity of 11.5 tons compared to the J-11D's nine tons, meaning it would be more suited to surveillance missions in the South China Sea. It is also more structurally advanced with a durability of 6,000 service hours and superior maximum take-off, flight and landing weights," the website said, citing Sina Military Network.

China needs both aircraft to maintain military its presence along the southeast coast of the country, the border with India and in the South China Sea, according to the media outlet. Beijing needs an aircraft capable of rivaling Japan's F-35s and India's Su-30MKI and T-50 planes but is unsure that J-11D jets will be a viable competitor.

But even if it is, China cannot produce enough single-seat, twin-engine fighters. According to some estimates, China produced some ten 10 J-11B/BS fighters, a previous version of the J-11D.

"China simply cannot wait another five or 10 years for next-generation aircraft to emerge, and the Su-35 does the job in boosting the PLA's air defense capabilities and at least gives China an aircraft that can take on the F35."

Read more: All You Need is Su-35: China Should Buy Russian Fighter Jets – Media


----------



## Akasa

AsianUnion said:


> *All You Need is Su-35: China Should Buy Russian Fighter Jets – Media*
> 
> © AP Photo/ Francois Mori
> MILITARY & INTELLIGENCE
> 
> *China will have to purchase Sukhoi Su-35 (Flanker-E) supermaneuverable multirole fighter jets despite the fact that Beijing is developing its own fourth generation aircraft, according to the Want China Times website.*
> 
> The latest modification of the Chinese fighter jet, the Shenyang J-11D, conducted its maiden flight last week. The J-11D, manufactured by the Shenyang Aircraft Corporation, is based on the Russian Sukhoi Su-27 jet. The Su-35 is also an upgraded version of the Su-27.
> 
> "The Su-35 has an internal fuel capacity of 11.5 tons compared to the J-11D's nine tons, meaning it would be more suited to surveillance missions in the South China Sea. It is also more structurally advanced with a durability of 6,000 service hours and superior maximum take-off, flight and landing weights," the website said, citing Sina Military Network.
> 
> China needs both aircraft to maintain military its presence along the southeast coast of the country, the border with India and in the South China Sea, according to the media outlet. Beijing needs an aircraft capable of rivaling Japan's F-35s and India's Su-30MKI and T-50 planes but is unsure that J-11D jets will be a viable competitor.
> 
> But even if it is, China cannot produce enough single-seat, twin-engine fighters. According to some estimates, China produced some ten 10 J-11B/BS fighters, a previous version of the J-11D.
> 
> "China simply cannot wait another five or 10 years for next-generation aircraft to emerge, and the Su-35 does the job in boosting the PLA's air defense capabilities and at least gives China an aircraft that can take on the F35."
> 
> Read more: All You Need is Su-35: China Should Buy Russian Fighter Jets – Media



There is no way the author of that article could've known the fuel capacity of the J-11D.

There is no talk from the Chinese suggesting that the J-11D is incapable of competing against the aforementioned jets and, most importantly, there are significantly more than just ten J-11B/BS.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## rcrmj

AsianUnion said:


> *All You Need is Su-35: China Should Buy Russian Fighter Jets – Media*
> 
> © AP Photo/ Francois Mori
> MILITARY & INTELLIGENCE
> 
> *China will have to purchase Sukhoi Su-35 (Flanker-E) supermaneuverable multirole fighter jets despite the fact that Beijing is developing its own fourth generation aircraft, according to the Want China Times website.*
> 
> The latest modification of the Chinese fighter jet, the Shenyang J-11D, conducted its maiden flight last week. The J-11D, manufactured by the Shenyang Aircraft Corporation, is based on the Russian Sukhoi Su-27 jet. The Su-35 is also an upgraded version of the Su-27.
> 
> "The Su-35 has an internal fuel capacity of 11.5 tons compared to the J-11D's nine tons, meaning it would be more suited to surveillance missions in the South China Sea. It is also more structurally advanced with a durability of 6,000 service hours and superior maximum take-off, flight and landing weights," the website said, citing Sina Military Network.
> 
> China needs both aircraft to maintain military its presence along the southeast coast of the country, the border with India and in the South China Sea, according to the media outlet. Beijing needs an aircraft capable of rivaling Japan's F-35s and India's Su-30MKI and T-50 planes but is unsure that J-11D jets will be a viable competitor.
> 
> But even if it is, China cannot produce enough single-seat, twin-engine fighters. According to some estimates, China produced some ten 10 J-11B/BS fighters, a previous version of the J-11D.
> 
> "China simply cannot wait another five or 10 years for next-generation aircraft to emerge, and the Su-35 does the job in boosting the PLA's air defense capabilities and at least gives China an aircraft that can take on the F35."
> 
> Read more: All You Need is Su-35: China Should Buy Russian Fighter Jets – Media


no more than a farce```the Su-35 talk is almost dead, PLAAF is in no dire need of Su-35, neither of its engine nor 'advancement' that we dont have... in fact the Chinese team was quite disappointed with its radar, avionics and weapon package, so to insist Russia to modify it in order to accommodate our own radar, avionics and weapons```

and the worst part is that due to the Western suppliers for parts, that made the price of Su-35 ridiculously high, not worth for its capability at all

J-10C, J-11D, J-15 and J-16 are not in any significant disadvantage to the much bragged Su-35


----------



## BoQ77

*China bought Russian fighter Su-35*
November 18, 2015 




@cnleio ; @SinoSoldier 

Russia and China signed a contract to purchase 24 new Su-35 fighters worth at least $ 2 billion. It is reported in Thursday November 19 «Kommersant» citing sources in the field of military-technical cooperation.

“China officially became the first foreign customer of the Su-35 is unprecedented in the history of the contract deliveries of combat aircraft” – said one of the interlocutors “Kommersant”. According to the newspaper the cost of a single fighter for China will be $ 83 million. Making no further details of the transaction confirmed the general director of the state corporation “Rostec” Chemezov.

According to the newspaper the contract does not provide for the licensed production of the Su-35 in China. In this capacity avizavoda in Komsomolsk-on-Amur will allow to perform the contract without affecting the production of this type of fighter for the Russian Air Force.

In May 2014 the United Aircraft Corporation President Mikhail Pogosyan said that Beijing intends to acquire a large batch of Su-35 fighters. In October Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said that in the near future is likely to be signed a contract to supply 24 fighter aircraft of this type.

Su-35 – multirole fighter of 4 ++ generation the latest combat aircraft built on a platform of T-10C which became the basis for the fighters of the Su-27 / Su-30 and their modifications. This is conceptually a new car with the aerodynamics of the Su-27 and the elements of the avionics of military aircraft of the fifth generation. Under the current state program of armaments Aerospace forces should receive 96 Su-35s until 2020.

November 8 2015 it became known that the decision to buy the Su-35 took Indonesia. In addition negotiations on the purchase of these fighters lead United Arab Emirates

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 21stCentury

There's about a hundred of such articles out there about China buying the Su-35, but none actually authentic.


----------



## cnleio

Not 100% sure, just a 'Maybe'.


----------



## BoQ77

cnleio said:


> Not 100% sure, just a 'Maybe'.



If the deal is real, what does it mean? Why you appear to dislike the deal?

In summary,
1. The contracted signed, 83 mil. / each of unarmed Su-35
2. no assembly in China. No licence for production
3. delivery estimates on 2018-2020


----------



## Beast

BoQ77 said:


> *China bought Russian fighter Su-35*
> November 18, 2015
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @cnleio ; @SinoSoldier
> 
> Russia and China signed a contract to purchase 24 new Su-35 fighters worth at least $ 2 billion. It is reported in Thursday November 19 «Kommersant» citing sources in the field of military-technical cooperation.
> 
> “China officially became the first foreign customer of the Su-35 is unprecedented in the history of the contract deliveries of combat aircraft” – said one of the interlocutors “Kommersant”. According to the newspaper the cost of a single fighter for China will be $ 83 million. Making no further details of the transaction confirmed the general director of the state corporation “Rostec” Chemezov.
> 
> According to the newspaper the contract does not provide for the licensed production of the Su-35 in China. In this capacity avizavoda in Komsomolsk-on-Amur will allow to perform the contract without affecting the production of this type of fighter for the Russian Air Force.
> 
> In May 2014 the United Aircraft Corporation President Mikhail Pogosyan said that Beijing intends to acquire a large batch of Su-35 fighters. In October Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said that in the near future is likely to be signed a contract to supply 24 fighter aircraft of this type.
> 
> Su-35 – multirole fighter of 4 ++ generation the latest combat aircraft built on a platform of T-10C which became the basis for the fighters of the Su-27 / Su-30 and their modifications. This is conceptually a new car with the aerodynamics of the Su-27 and the elements of the avionics of military aircraft of the fifth generation. Under the current state program of armaments Aerospace forces should receive 96 Su-35s until 2020.
> 
> November 8 2015 it became known that the decision to buy the Su-35 took Indonesia. In addition negotiations on the purchase of these fighters lead United Arab Emirates



ROSOBORONEXPORT Latest news

You can check rosoboronexport and see for yourself whether such news exist?


----------



## Papa Dragon

Why is china interested in SU-35 when it has J 11-D?


----------



## qwerrty

lol this sh1t poppin up every 2-3 months

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## cnleio

BoQ77 said:


> If the deal is real, what does it mean? Why you appear to dislike the deal?


I welcome Su-35 to PLAAF, just China don't need too many foreign fighters ... buy some Su-35 not a bad deal to China. I said China air-defence need at least 1000x 3-gen ~ 4-gen fighters to fit for our modern Airforce ... right now only 600+ J-11/J-10 fighters the quantity is not enough yet, we can buy some from Russia and we also produce more new fighters like J-10B/J-11D/J-20/J-16/J-31 etc

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BoQ77

cnleio said:


> I welcome Su-35 to PLAAF, just China don't need too many foreign fighters ... buy some Su-35 not a bad deal to China. I said China air-defence need at least 1000x 3-gen ~ 4-gen fighters to fit for our modern Airforce ... right now only 600+ J-11/J-10 fighters the quantity is not enough yet, we can buy some from Russia and we also produce more new fighters like J-10B/J-11D/J-20/J-16/J-31 etc



Yes. It's a good deal. That aircraft is great too.



Beast said:


> ROSOBORONEXPORT Latest news
> 
> You can check rosoboronexport and see for yourself whether such news exist?



Russia and China signed the largest aircraft procurement contract 24
multifunctional fighters su-35. «Long negotiations for the supply of su-35 to China is completed, we signed the contract», — told the newspaper «Kommersant» the General Director of state Corporation «rostec» Sergey Chemezov.


----------



## SR-91

Papa Dragon said:


> Why is china interested in SU-35 when it has J 11-D?





Engine sir engine.
Need to R.E to fit on j20.
Why else, they have two 5th generation fighter flying, would they need to buy a previous generation jet. They need something.


----------



## cnleio

BoQ77 said:


> Yes. It's a good deal. That aircraft is great too.


U know the aircraft building is not fast, it's a handwork and the new fighter cost 2-3 months ... if Russian can provide new fighters to China within a short time, it's a good deal and save some time.

If 24x Su-35 fighters cost 2billion U.S is true, the deal sounds not expensive about 80+ mil USD per piece.

BTW the Sino-Russia Su-35 deal is not simple as we read on newspaper ... if im right, China will buy Russian 117S jet engines more than Su-35, Su-35 just a gift the big deal is the 117S jet engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stannis Baratheon

Papa Dragon said:


> Why is china interested in SU-35 when it has J 11-D?


They were interested in the engines used for it. But Russia weren't willing to just export the engines.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Stannis Baratheon said:


> They were interested in the engines used for it. But Russia weren't willing to just export the engines.



The 117S will be underpowered for the J-20.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Archie

Now I see a J18 popping in the horizon
Which will basically rip off all the tech from Su35


----------



## JSCh

*Russia, China Sign $2 Billion Contract on Delivery of Su-35 Fighters*
07:49 19.11.2015(updated 07:56 19.11.2015)

_Russia’s state technologies corporation Rostec head Sergey Chemezov announced that Russia and China have signed a contract, estimated to be worth $2 billion, on the delivery of 24 Russian Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets.
_




© Flickr/ Navneet Yadav​
MOSCOW (Sputnik) – Russia and China have signed a contract, estimated to be worth $2 billion, on the delivery of 24 Russian Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets, Russia’s state technologies corporation Rostec head Sergey Chemezov announced.

"The long negotiations on the delivery of Su-35 to China are over, we have signed a contract," Chemezov said as quoted by the Russian Kommersant daily on Thursday.​
The Su-35 fighter jet (NATO reporting name Flanker-E) is an upgraded version of the Su-27 multirole fighter. It was first introduced to a foreign audience at the 2013 Paris Air Show.

Indonesia, Brazil and the United Arab Emirates have also expressed interest in purchasing Su-35 jets, according to Rostec.

On Wednesday, Indonesian Ambassador to Russia Djauhari Oratmangun said that a Russian-Indonesian joint commission on military-technical cooperation will discuss the purchase of the Russian Sukhoi Su-35 fighters in late November in Jakarta.

Russia, China Sign $2 Billion Contract on Delivery of Su-35 Fighters

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Providence

China can learn from Su35 a great deal.


----------



## Beast

BoQ77 said:


> Yes. It's a good deal. That aircraft is great too.
> 
> 
> 
> Russia and China signed the largest aircraft procurement contract 24
> multifunctional fighters su-35. «Long negotiations for the supply of su-35 to China is completed, we signed the contract», — told the newspaper «Kommersant» the General Director of state Corporation «rostec» Sergey Chemezov.


THis kind of garbage repeated many times. We have the so called Kommersant bragging about this deal or not. End of the day, all comfirmation needed to be announced by Rosoboronexport. No news mean it just a meaningless fart


----------



## [Bregs]

China too might be shying away from buying it as this seems to be upgraded features version of su30mk which they already posses in large numbers

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dungeness

Only 24? Chinese are really frugal people, with their defense budget, they should have bought hundreds, and make it "Mother Of All Deals".


----------



## BoQ77

Beast said:


> THis kind of garbage repeated many times. We have the so called Kommersant bragging about this deal or not. End of the day, all comfirmation needed to be announced by Rosoboronexport. No news mean it just a meaningless fart



I think the news could come up next few days. It looks real.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

BoQ77 said:


> I think the news could come up next few days. It looks real.


wait for few days the news become real then talk abt it


----------



## Papa Dragon

Dungeness said:


> Only 24? Chinese are really frugal people, with their defense budget, they should have bought hundreds, and make it "Mother Of All Deals".


Since Chinese want the engine tech and Russia was not willing to sell the engine alone, they are going for 24. I guess Russians initially wanted the Chinese to buy 48 jets but due to recent economic sanctions, they agreed the Chinese proposal of 24.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

Beast said:


> wait for few days the news become real then talk abt it



That's the news you want, news from Rostec
This thread also is about the news.


----------



## Beast

BoQ77 said:


> That's the news you want, news from Rostec
> This thread also is about the news.


What is Rostec? Mining, investment and commercial manufacturing.... Rosobornexport deals only in Russian military. If Rosoboronexport has no news that means nothing happen for this 24 Su-35.


----------



## Perpendicular

SR-91 said:


> Engine sir engine.
> Need to R.E to fit on j20.
> Why else, they have two 5th generation fighter flying, would they need to buy a previous generation jet. They need something.


Don't let 5th gen looks fool you mate.


----------



## BoQ77

cnleio said:


> U know the aircraft building is not fast, it's a handwork and the new fighter cost 2-3 months ... if Russian can provide new fighters to China within a short time, it's a good deal and save some time.
> If 24x Su-35 fighters cost 2billion U.S is true, the deal sounds not expensive about 80+ mil USD per piece.
> BTW the Sino-Russia Su-35 deal is not simple as we read on newspaper ... *if im right, China will buy Russian 117S jet engines more than Su-35*, Su-35 just a gift the big deal is the 117S jet engine.



I wonder what China wanna do with 117S at the time the Su-35 delivered,
about at least 3 years later.



Beast said:


> What is Rostec? Mining, investment and commercial manufacturing.... Rosobornexport deals only in Russian military. *If Rosoboronexport has no news that means nothing happen* for this 24 Su-35.



Really? I guess Rosobornexport need Rostec confirmation before posting any news.

Rostec owns 100% of the shares of OJSC Rosoboronexport. The head of the company is Anatoly Petrovich Isaikin, who is the member of the Board of Rostec.
Rosoboronexport is wholly subsidiary of Rostec.

*Sergey Viktorovich Chemezov* is CEO of Rostec Corporation (formerly the Director General of Rosoboronexport)


----------



## Zarvan

cnleio said:


> I welcome Su-35 to PLAAF, just China don't need too many foreign fighters ... buy some Su-35 not a bad deal to China. I said China air-defence need at least 1000x 3-gen ~ 4-gen fighters to fit for our modern Airforce ... right now only 600+ J-11/J-10 fighters the quantity is not enough yet, we can buy some from Russia and we also produce more new fighters like J-10B/J-11D/J-20/J-16/J-31 etc


What about your claims of J-11 D being equal to SU-35 ?


----------



## BoQ77

Zarvan said:


> What about your claims of J-11 D being equal to SU-35 ?



I think no one knows exactly what J-11D could perform.


----------



## Dungeness

Beast said:


> wait for few days the news become real then talk abt it



The new has been confirmed by ex test pilot Xu Yonglin on weibo.


----------



## qwerrty

Dungeness said:


> The new has been confirmed by ex test pilot Xu Yonglin on weibo.


 most probably just quoting russian source. they do that all the time

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

*Shakes head...


----------



## 大汉奸柳传志

So we bought 48 engines for 2bln..congrats!


----------



## Economic superpower

qwerrty said:


> most probably just quoting russian source. they do that all the time



Most Chinese reporting on Su-35 is based on Russian reports.


----------



## Akasa

Perpendicular said:


> Don't let 5th gen looks fool you mate.



No, but don't let unwarranted doubt fool you either. 



Zarvan said:


> What about your claims of J-11 D being equal to SU-35 ?



What makes you think that the deal, assuming that it turns out to be true, is about capability rather than a need for certain subsystems, such as engines?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cnleio

Zarvan said:


> What about your claims of J-11 D being equal to SU-35 ?


I didn't say that ... J-11D is the China flanker with AESA radar.

Anyways One hand buying Su-35, one hand building J-11D, both continue nobody tell u Chinese won't design & produce more domestic fighters. Do u think 24x Su-35 deal is many for PLAAF ?


----------



## Perpendicular

SinoSoldier said:


> unwarranted


Unwarranted ! 
After this deal.


----------



## Akasa

Perpendicular said:


> Unwarranted !
> After this deal.



Again, if this news turns out to be true, what makes you think the Chinese are buying Su-35s for their abilities?


----------



## volatile

Seems W/W for both china can fullfill there gap of acquiring latest fighter with its own assembly as well .Russia finds buyer .I wish PAF can also club there deal either with China on purchasing SU35 from Russia (combine order) or with any friendly country .


----------



## Akasa

volatile said:


> Seems W/W for both china can fullfill there gap of acquiring latest fighter with its own assembly as well .Russia finds buyer .I wish PAF can also club there deal either with China on purchasing SU35 from Russia (combine order) or with any friendly country .



Highly doubtful that a potential Su-35 purchase is for "filling gaps"; 24 is too few for that.


----------



## volatile

SinoSoldier said:


> Highly doubtful that a potential Su-35 purchase is for "filling gaps"; 24 is too few for that.


No but also gives access to 48 engines .See This deal makes sense


----------



## Sanchez

According to the weibo of Xu Yonglin, the contract was signed. It's more of a political decision than military.


----------



## Deino

At least I wouldn't mind !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brainsucker

Zarvan said:


> What about your claims of J-11 D being equal to SU-35 ?



It is not a matter of quality / technology. It's a matter of quantity. At least, that what I see from what Cnleio said.


----------



## Zarvan

Deino said:


> At least I wouldn't mind !
> 
> View attachment 273280


Well questions would be raised on Chinese claim about J-11 D


----------



## Deino

A hint for maybe the true reason of this deal:



> ...
> На встрече с представителями КНР управляющий директор УМПО Евгений Семивеличенко подтвердил готовность предприятия выполнять существующие обязательства в рамках военно-технического сотрудничества между двумя странами, также возможность работать по перспективным проектам, в том числе по двигателям АЛ‑41Ф‑1С, применяемым на новейших истребителях Су‑35 и серийно производящимся на заводе.
> ...



Делегация высшего государственного и военного руководства КНР посетила крупнейшее предприятие ОДК



> ...
> At a meeting with representatives of CHINA Managing Director of "UMPO" Eugene Semiveličenko confirmed the readiness of enterprises to implement existing commitments in the framework of the military-technical cooperation between the two countries, also the opportunity to work on promising projects, including the AL‑41F‑1Sengines used on the latest fighters Su‑35 and where to plant.
> ...


Via Bing !

Deino


----------



## Akasa

Zarvan said:


> Well questions would be raised on Chinese claim about J-11 D



Why? The deal, if true, doesn't sound like it was due to a need for a "better plane".


----------



## Deino

Zarvan said:


> Well questions would be raised on Chinese claim about J-11 D




Why ??? The D is still in development and as such I think we all should calm down and first of all wait for confirmation even if I agree, that this time it seems much more reliable than all previous reports.

As such all our personnel feelings - be that "Russian-fan-boy like: hey You get out best fighter, so Your J-11s must be worse !! - or PLAAF-na-boy like: they are stupid, the PLAAF has the J-11D, so all is wrong - should be out aside.

If the PLAAF will get the Su-35, so take it what it is: A win_win-situatioin for both !!

The PLAAF will get a new fighter, that brings new capabilities, an inseight into the nearyl latest Russian avionics and propulsion systems, the opportunity to explore TVC for the first time ans as such to develop tactics to use or avoid them ... and maybe also access to the 117S engine to power the the J-20. Weren't there reports abaout a mayor engine -surprise on '2017' ???

And Russia receives finally an export customer for its Su-35, much public attention and by the way .. that all for only 2 billion $ !

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## egodoc222

The country that claims that it has two fifth gen fighter programs running and ready for mass production...buys 4++ gen fighter??
Lol
It speaks volumes about the technological gap between two countries!!


----------



## cnleio

China Su-35 will equip latest domestic PL-10 and PL-15 missiles, it's China customer version from Russia not the original Su-35sk ... Russian opened fire-control/radar code & API, Chinese will install domestic sub-systems on PLAAF Su-35 fighters. According to the deal, extra 117S jet engines will export to China.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

utp45 said:


> So we bought 48 engines for 2bln..congrats!



Think about the WS-15, then think how good the 117S is in comparison.



Deino said:


> Why ??? The D is still in development and as such I think we all should calm down and first of all wait for confirmation even if I agree, that this time it seems much more reliable than all previous reports.
> 
> As such all our personnel feelings - be that "Russian-fan-boy like: hey You get out best fighter, so Your J-11s must be worse !! - or PLAAF-na-boy like: they are stupid, the PLAAF has the J-11D, so all is wrong - should be out aside.
> 
> If the PLAAF will get the Su-35, so take it what it is: A win_win-situatioin for both !!
> 
> The PLAAF will get a new fighter, that brings new capabilities, an inseight into the nearyl latest Russian avionics and propulsion systems, the opportunity to explore TVC for the first time ans as such to develop tactics to use or avoid them ... *and maybe also access to the 117S engine to power the the J-20*. Weren't there reports abaout a mayor engine -surprise on '2017' ???
> 
> And Russia receives finally an export customer for its Su-35, much public attention and by the way .. that all for only 2 billion $ !



Nope, the current engine for the J-20 is more powerful than the 117S.


----------



## Gen Padmanabhan

Deino said:


> Why ??? The D is still in development and as such I think we all should calm down and first of all wait for confirmation even if I agree, that this time it seems much more reliable than all previous reports.
> 
> As such all our personnel feelings - be that "Russian-fan-boy like: hey You get out best fighter, so Your J-11s must be worse !! - or PLAAF-na-boy like: they are stupid, the PLAAF has the J-11D, so all is wrong - should be out aside.
> 
> If the PLAAF will get the Su-35, so take it what it is: A win_win-situatioin for both !!
> 
> The PLAAF will get a new fighter, that brings new capabilities, an inseight into the nearyl latest Russian avionics and propulsion systems, the opportunity to explore TVC for the first time ans as such to develop tactics to use or avoid them ... and maybe also access to the 117S engine to power the the J-20. Weren't there reports abaout a mayor engine -surprise on '2017' ???
> 
> And Russia receives finally an export customer for its Su-35, much public attention and by the way .. that all for only 2 billion $ !



So, China spending $2 bn of taxpayers money for getting insight in SU-35?


----------



## cnleio

egodoc222 said:


> The country that claims that it has two fifth gen fighter programs running and ready for mass production...buys 4++ gen fighter??
> Lol
> It speaks volumes about the technological gap between two countries!!


Prepare ur money to buy Su-35 from Russia, Indian. When IAF face PLAAF 1,000x 4gen - 5gen fighters in next 5-6 years, don't wet ur pant. Right now China just lack 300+ fighters to reach the quantity, not too long we can finish it.


----------



## Gen Padmanabhan

egodoc222 said:


> The country that claims that it has two fifth gen fighter programs running and ready for mass production...buys 4++ gen fighter??
> Lol
> It speaks volumes about the technological gap between two countries!!


This is hilarious case , isnt it?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

Zarvan said:


> Well questions would be raised on Chinese claim about J-11D



Pakistan should also consider 36 Su-35 for the maritime role. The J-11D can also perform that role.


----------



## Beast

I highly doubt the deal is signed. No official comfirmation yet.



cnleio said:


> China Su-35 will equip latest domestic PL-10 and PL-15 missiles, it's China customer version from Russia not the original Su-35sk ... Russian opened fire-control/radar code & API, Chinese will install domestic sub-systems on PLAAF Su-35 fighters. According to the deal, extra 117S jet engines will export to China.
> View attachment 273305



Very unlikely Russian will open their PESA and system source code to customise according to Chinese missile.
Until official statement present. I dont think China will buy Su-35.



Dungeness said:


> The new has been confirmed by ex test pilot Xu Yonglin on weibo.


What has they signed? If so Rosoboronexport will report any export or confirmation of military deal for Russian. Nothing so far.


----------



## cnleio

Beast said:


> I highly doubt the deal is signed. No official comfirmation yet.
> Very unlikely Russian will open their PESA and system source code to customise according to Chinese missile.
> Until official statement present. I dont think China will buy Su-35.


Not a groundless rumor, 90% the deal signed ... next day waiting for China official news.







*Here is how many PLAAF J-7 fighters (China mig21) need to replace by Su-35/J-10BC/J-11D/J-15/J-16/J-20/J-31 in next 5-6 years for PLAAF* ... so the Su-35 China customer version not bad. @egodoc222


----------



## Jlaw

Dungeness said:


> Only 24? Chinese are really frugal people, with their defense budget, they should have bought hundreds, and make it "Mother Of All Deals".


If this deal is real, which is probably not unless I hear it from official Chinese source. The 24 fighters is for symbolic reason.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 大汉奸柳传志

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Think about the WS-15, then think how good the 117S is in comparison.


I just can‘t think of a reason other than engines，at least not one worth 2 bln.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

utp45 said:


> I just can‘t think of a reason other than engines，at least not one worth 2 bln.



More of a political reason.

Russia's economy was hurt after the sanctions, they need a push for their manufacturing goods.

Seriously, the 117S got nothing to do with the J-20.

The J-20 needs the 5th gen engine that at least matches the performance of the F119, and no one could help us on this.

Even Russia is also developing its own 5th gen engine, but they won't sell us their latest technology.

The only thing that is relevant for the J-20 is the WS-15, and nothing else.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jlaw

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> More of a political reason.
> 
> Russia's economy was hurt after the sanctions, they need a push for their manufacturing goods.
> 
> Seriously, the 117S got nothing to do with the J-20.
> 
> The J-20 needs the 5th gen engine that at least matches the performance of the F119, and no one could help us on this.
> 
> Even Russia is also developing its own 5th gen engine, but they won't sell us their latest technology.
> 
> The only thing that is relevant for the J-20 is the WS-15, and nothing else.


If China wanted to fill the gap or get the Russian engines, would they not order at least 150 fighters? The 24 fighters like you said is political and symbolic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

ArsalanKhan21 said:


> Pakistan should also consider 36 Su-35 for the maritime role. The J-11D can also perform that role.



The J-11D and Su-35 will fight in the PLA's wartime simulation; the J-11D will play the red, and the Su-35 will play the blue.



Jlaw said:


> If China wanted to fill the gap or get the Russian engines, would they not order at least 150 fighters? The 24 fighters like you said is political and symbolic.



The new variant of the WS-10 engine is already close to 145kN in its afterburner.

But the China bashers would desperately need this news to bash the J-20 and China's domestic turbofan engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jlaw

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The J-11D and Su-35 will fight in the PLA's wartime simulation; the J-11D will play the red, and the Su-35 will play the blue.
> 
> 
> 
> The new variant of the WS-10 engine is already close to 145kN in its afterburner.
> 
> But the China bashers would desperately need this news to bash the J-20 and China's domestic turbofan engine.



I don't mind the bashers as they are mainly Indians. It's like homeless people making fun of millionaires

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue Marlin

*Russia Confirms Sale of 24 Su-35 Fighter Aircraft To China*
Source : Our Bureau ~ Dated : Thursday, November 19, 2015 @ 08:51 AM
Views : 386 A- A A+




Sukhoi Su-35 Fighter Jet: Image by Sukhoi Corp

Russia has signed a contract with China to sell 24 Sukhoi 35 multi role fighter aircraft worth US$ 2 billion.

Russia’s state technologies corporation, Rostec head Sergey Chemezov announced that Russia and China have signed a contract, estimated to be worth $2 billion, on the delivery of 24 Russian Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets.

"The long negotiations on the delivery of Su-35 to China are over, we have signed a contract," Chemezov said as quoted by the Russian Kommersant daily on Thursday.

The Su-35 fighter jet (NATO reporting name Flanker-E) is an upgraded version of the Su-27 multirole fighter. This marks the first international sale of the Sukhoi Su-35 fighter which has taken part in the war against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq

Chemezov did not disclose terms of the contract or the delivery timeframe.

Moscow has been negotiating with Beijing for over two years to sell the aircraft, ever since the Paris Air Show 2013 debut of the Su-35.

There were issues of protecting intellectual property with China having a history of ‘copying’ Russian aircraft it had earlier purchased from Moscow. This seems to have been resolved as earlier reports on the proposed Su-35 purchase deal had highlighted the intellectual property issue as the main impediment.
Russia Confirms Sale of 24 Su-35 Fighter Aircraft To China


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> But the China bashers would desperately need this news to bash the J-20 and China's domestic turbofan engine.



The haters always underplay the strength capabilities of their opponents. Only when they need to increase their defence budget they overplay the strength of their enemies.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Jlaw said:


> I don't mind the bashers as they are mainly Indians. It's like homeless people making fun of millionaires



Also, let those US fanboys to be delusional for a while that "China still needs the Russian military hardwares".


----------



## 大汉奸柳传志

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> More of a political reason.
> 
> Russia's economy was hurt after the sanctions, they need a push for their manufacturing goods.
> 
> Seriously, the 117S got nothing to do with the J-20.
> 
> The J-20 needs the 5th gen engine that at least matches the performance of the F119, and no one could help us on this.
> 
> Even Russia is also developing its own 5th gen engine, but they won't sell us their latest technology.
> 
> The only thing that is relevant for the J-20 is the WS-15, and nothing else.



So you are saying it‘s an advertisement for the Su-35. 

At the expense of everyone now thinks the J-11D is inferior.

And we are the one who is paying $$$ for it!!

Something doesn’t add up.


----------



## Deino

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> ...
> 
> 
> Nope, the current engine for the J-20 is more powerful than the 117S.




That's something You need to explain ! The 117S is rated at 142 kN ... not sure what Chinese engine - and please not the WS-10, since it is no Taihang - the J-20 is using with a higher thrust.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

utp45 said:


> So you are saying it‘s an advertisement for the Su-35.
> 
> At the expense of everyone now thinks the J-11D is inferior.
> 
> And we are the one who is paying $$$ for it!!
> 
> Something doesn’t add up.



The J-11D vs Su-35 will happen soon in the PLA wartime simulation after the Su-35 induction.

I also hate this decision, but sometimes we need to make some sacrifice for the long term goal.



Deino said:


> That's something You need to explain ! The 117S is rated at 142 kN ... not sure what Chinese engine - and please not the WS-10, since it is no Taihang - the J-20 is using with a higher thrust.



The WS-10 in the Zhuhai Expo was already close to 140kN, and usually China won't display its newest model.

As for the J-20, anything less than 155kN is useless.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pangu

I see no reason why we should not purchase these birds to speed up the renewal process of obsolete units. Keeping ourselves invested in the continuing evolution of the Flankers, even when we are developing our own variant, is the smart thing to do.


----------



## Beast

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> More of a political reason.
> 
> Russia's economy was hurt after the sanctions, they need a push for their manufacturing goods.
> 
> Seriously, the 117S got nothing to do with the J-20.
> 
> The J-20 needs the 5th gen engine that at least matches the performance of the F119, and no one could help us on this.
> 
> Even Russia is also developing its own 5th gen engine, but they won't sell us their latest technology.
> 
> The only thing that is relevant for the J-20 is the WS-15, and nothing else.


If this deal is true. The one who authorize this deal shall be shot. There are many ways to boast russian economy for allies but buying useless stuff is a massive waste of Chinese taxpayers money.

During the inauguration of C919 , president Xi Emphasize on changing the old Chinese mentality of "rather buy from abroad than the long process of build our own". Look like some old fart from CPC still had these kind of stupid mentality.

These ultra old conservative shall be sacked and not allowed to continue their post in CPC.

Su-35 served no purpose in PLAAF. Maintenance is nightmare and serve no advancement for PLAAF.



Pangu said:


> I see no reason why we should not purchase these birds to speed up the renewal process of obsolete units. Keeping ourselves invested in the continuing evolution of the Flankers, even when we are developing our own variant, is the smart thing to do.


 Paid for more J-11B or J-11BS is a better solution. Buying 24 Su-35 for PLAAF is an ultra dumb idea.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Beast said:


> If this deal is true. The one who authorize this deal shall be shot. There are many ways to boast russian economy for allies but buying useless stuff is a massive waste of Chinese taxpayers money.
> 
> During the inauguration of C919 , president Xi Emphasize on changing the old Chinese mentality of "rather buy from abroad than the long process of build our own". Look like some old fart from CPC still had these kind of stupid mentality.
> 
> *These ultra old conservative shall be sacked and not allowed to continue their post in CPC.*
> 
> Su-35 served no purpose in PLAAF. Maintenance is nightmare and serve no advancement for PLAAF.



The true conservative CPC members won't do that, only those liberal CPC members who will try to appease anyone even at the expense of its own national interests.

See those CD members who constantly use the Russian military hardwares to bash China, mostly of them are the US fanboys, not the Russian fanboys.

Now the public opinion is like a battlefield, and it seems that many high rank CPC officials except Xi Jinping still haven't realized its importance.


----------



## kuge

will there be exclusive logistic & support for only 24 su35?


----------



## Beast

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> The true conservative CPC members won't do that, only those liberal CPC members who will try to appease anyone even at the expense of its own national interests.


The more liberal CPC are in fact more patriotic and trust made in China stuff. Those old time general in PLA are those who always believe foreign stuff is better and domestic made equipment are not good enough. Like what I mention of the typical old Chinese thinking during Deng xiaoping times "buy from abroad is better and faster than build your own stuff."

During Deng xiaoping time, our technology is weak but now is 2015. This old mentality cannot be accepted. Any CPC member who still harbour such old mentality are HANJIAN. They just wish to continue see China as weak.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Beast said:


> The more liberal CPC are in fact more patriotic and trust made in China stuff. Those old time general in PLA are those who always believe foreign stuff is better and domestic made equipment are not good enough. Like what I mention of the typical old Chinese thinking during Deng xiaoping times "buy from abroad is better and faster than build your own stuff."
> 
> During Deng xiaoping time, our technology is weak but now is 2015. This old mentality cannot be accepted. Any CPC member who still harbour such old mentality are HANJIAN. They just wish to continue see China as weak.



Maoism vs Dengism, you will see the difference.

Mao created the project for Y-10, while Deng destroyed it.

Shanghai Y-10 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If the Y-10 wasn't scrapped by Deng and his liberal think tanks, then China would already build something similar to the Boeing 747 by now.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Maoism vs Dengism, you will see the difference.
> 
> Mao created the project for Y-10, while Deng destroyed it.
> 
> Shanghai Y-10 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> If the Y-10 wasn't scrapped by Deng and his liberal think tanks, then China would already build something similar to the Boeing 747 by now.


Fully agree. Unfortunately, there are too many old time general in PLA who dare not take risk and obsess with safer method. CPC shall promote more younger and newer ideas commander to replace those old fart.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Beast said:


> Fully agree. Unfortunately, there are too many old time general in PLA who dare not take risk and obsess with safer method. CPC shall promote more younger and newer ideas commander to replace those old fart.



Even you dislike Mao, but you have to agree when it comes to support the domestic products, no one is more patriotic than Mao.

It is true that Deng has revitalized China's economy, but when it comes to the support for our domestic products, our leaders need to develop the mentality of Chairman Mao.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Beast

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Even you dislike Mao, but you have to agree when it comes to support the domestic products, no one is more patriotic than Mao.
> 
> It is true that Deng has revitalized China's economy, but when it comes to the support for our domestic products, our leaders need the mentality of Chairman Mao.


If mao is still alive, he would have skin the general who approved the Su-35 deal if true.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Beast said:


> If mao is still alive, he would have skin the general who approved the Su-35 deal if true.



If Mao is still alive, China might be economically slightly smaller than now, but its military would have already surpassed the US.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> If Mao is still alive, China might be economically slightly smaller than now, but its military would have already surpassed the US.



I still prefer Deng but Deng has his own flaw and imperfect too.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Beast said:


> I still prefer Deng but Deng has his own flaw and imperfect too.



Deng needs to be as patriotic and tough as Mao.

However, no one in this world is perfect.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Deng needs to be as patriotic and tough as Mao.
> 
> However, no one in this world is perfect.


Deng is a more practical person. One good personality of him is he is not that stubborn.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Beast said:


> Deng is a more practical person. One good personality of him is he is not that stubborn.



Just because he is too pragmatic, that's why he probably won't chew on the hard bone like Mao.

Mao could do everything to acquire the H-bomb despite China wasn't ready to make a such huge leap during that time.

If it was Deng, then he would probably give up due the external/internal pressure.

Because of Mao's stubbornness, China has acquired the H-bomb/satellite/ICBM/nuclear sub very early.

Because of Deng's pragmatism, China has become the second largest (de facto the largest) economy today.

That's why CPC always strictly emphasizes to not deny Mao because of Deng or to not deny Deng because of Mao.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## egodoc222

cnleio said:


> Prepare ur money to buy Su-35 from Russia, Indian. When IAF face PLAAF 1,000x 4gen - 5gen fighters in next 5-6 years, don't wet ur pant. Right now China just lack 300+ fighters to reach the quantity, not too long we can finish it.


Still you didn't answer my question...why buy? When you claim your aerospace industry is better than Russia's....why buy a 4++ gen fighter when you have j30 and apparently capable aerospace industry...why?


----------



## Bussard Ramjet

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Maoism vs Dengism, you will see the difference.
> 
> Mao created the project for Y-10, while Deng destroyed it.
> 
> Shanghai Y-10 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> If the Y-10 wasn't scrapped by Deng and his liberal think tanks, then China would already build something similar to the Boeing 747 by now.



Deng is who created modern CHina, or else in Mao's China, everyone would be just struggling finding food.



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> If Mao is still alive, China might be economically slightly smaller than now, but its military would have already surpassed the US.



That is not technically possible, because Technology and scientific advances are made with economic progress, and a nation's industrial capacity.



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Deng needs to be as patriotic and tough as Mao.
> 
> However, no one in this world is perfect.



Deng was more patriotic than Mao. 

It was Mao, who for his own ego, and legacy, started the cultural revolution, and led the nation to the brink of collapse.


----------



## lonelyman

egodoc222 said:


> Still you didn't answer my question...why buy? When you claim your aerospace industry is better than Russia's....why buy a 4++ gen fighter when you have j30 and apparently capable aerospace industry...why?



So what, China needs 3000+ 4 generation fighters, right now we only have 800+. Plus this money is peanuts to China, sort of support our ally Russia to pummel ISIS.

And we get benefits from 117s engine too, it's a win win for everybody.


----------



## Ind4Ever

Apart from being very alarming in an Indian and American point of view. Where are those cheerleaders who said this deal don't exist and China won't buy 4++ generation fighter anymore? Looks like this number could go way beyond 24 and could reach a century or so. 

What it really mean for people of China? 

1) Insecurity of current Chinese made aircraft is given 

2) Chinese leaders themselves don't think China is in position to go for war with current capabilities. Think about it. What if Vietnam gets Su35 or what will be the reaction in China establishment when India signs deals for PakFa and lay down the ground work for FGFA. This deal as put China atleast 15 years backwards. 

3) Chinese claims of having in-house capacity to produce world class weapons is seriously scrutinized. Check below listing :

China's best engine : imported from Russia. Works for indegineous engine (Literally a Ripoff) going on for more than 30 years. 

China's best war ship? Designed and built in China by Russians 

China's best cruise missiles. An Soviet Union Ripoff 

China's missile force : Soviet and current Russians technology and with more Ripoff. 

China's best Attack helicopters : Secretly signed deal with Russia to design and build in China. Even India is in the verge to cracking world's most powerful Light attack choppers. 

List Is soo on. If this goes through, it will hurt the morale of Chinese armed forces and more over people on China. As we all know Chinese armed procurements are largely indulged in corrupt practices. Just pay a lump they will buy your weapon in large numbers and officials push for export for more kickbacks. 

Am I wrong in looking at this deal in this manner? As I already said. It's gonna be a huge blow to our power-packed buildup against China at borders and at SCS. Now US airforce can't claim that in just a week 2 fleet of USAF can wipe 50% Chinese Aircrafts at will. As Russians built these tech while keeping American massive numbers and avionics superiority. 

Now my fingers crossed for PakFa and much rumoured Su35S and super Sukois upgrades goes through before end of this year.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## $@rJen

@Zarvan What's up.. are you still going to tell people to grow up???


----------



## Akasa

egodoc222 said:


> The country that claims that it has two fifth gen fighter programs running and ready for mass production...buys 4++ gen fighter??
> Lol
> It speaks volumes about the technological gap between two countries!!



What makes you think this deal, *if true*, is due to a lack of capability?


----------



## kurutoga

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Even you dislike Mao, but you have to agree when it comes to support the domestic products, no one is more patriotic than Mao.



Support domestic products or getting China into sanctions.



Ind4Ever said:


> India signs deals for PakFa and lay down the ground work for FGFA.



Do you honestly believe India is getting PakFa? Yes, they paid the money. But, everything else is in the status of emperor's new clothes.


----------



## j20blackdragon

Several things do not make sense.

Why develop the J-11D first and then buy the Su-35 later?







Why upgrade the Su-30MK2 to a PL-12 standard if Russian radar/avionics and weapons are so good? I'm sure Russia would love to sell more R-77s.






The J-20 does not require the 117S. These mysterious black engines were unveiled a week before Xi Jinping visited Washington in September this year, obviously as a form of muscle flexing in front of Obama. They are clearly not AL-31FN.










AL-31FN looks like this. I'm sure we've all seen enough J-10 pictures to know what the AL-31FN looks like by now.






The only explanation that would make sense is that China wants to buy 24 Su-35s to form an aggressor squadron. What's the point of buying a foreign fighter that can't even datalink with Chinese AEW&C aircraft?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Akasa

Ind4Ever said:


> 1) Insecurity of current Chinese made aircraft is given


The low numbers supposedly procured (24), as well as the development/production of aircraft such as the J-15, J-16, J-10C, and soon J-20 and J-11D, suggest otherwise.



Ind4Ever said:


> 2) Chinese leaders themselves don't think China is in position to go for war with current capabilities. Think about it. What if Vietnam gets Su35 or what will be the reaction in China establishment when India signs deals for PakFa and lay down the ground work for FGFA. This deal as put China atleast 15 years backwards.


What makes you think that? Procuring a platform (if this deal is true) isn't always to make up for a lack in capability. In fact, the similarities between the Su-35 and J-11D/J-16 suggests that this deal isn't about capabilities at all.



Ind4Ever said:


> 3) Chinese claims of having in-house capacity to produce world class weapons is seriously scrutinized. Check below listing :
> 
> China's best engine : imported from Russia. Works for indegineous engine (Literally a Ripoff) going on for more than 30 years.


False. The WS-10 bears no relation to any Russian engine and has been in service aboard the J-10B/C prototypes, J-11B, J-16, and J-15 prototypes. Over 500 have been produced.



Ind4Ever said:


> China's best war ship? Designed and built in China by Russians


So, it just so happens that a "Russian-designed" warship in China manage to feature capabilities and subsystems far more advanced anything Russia has herself? Come on, you are better than that.



Ind4Ever said:


> China's best cruise missiles. An Soviet Union Ripoff


There is no evidence to suggest that.



Ind4Ever said:


> China's missile force : Soviet and current Russians technology and with more Ripoff.


And yet somehow these missiles frequently manage to outperform their "original" counterparts.



Ind4Ever said:


> China's best Attack helicopters : Secretly signed deal with Russia to design and build in China. Even India is in the verge to cracking world's most powerful Light attack choppers.


False. Kamov provided consultation during the concept stage, which is very different from the blueprinting stage that was undertaken by the Chinese. This is not to mention that the subsystems aboard the helicopters are Chinese.



Ind4Ever said:


> Now US airforce can't claim that in just a week 2 fleet of USAF can wipe 50% Chinese Aircrafts at will.


Who said they could do so in the first place?



egodoc222 said:


> Still you didn't answer my question...why buy? When you claim your aerospace industry is better than Russia's....why buy a 4++ gen fighter when you have j30 and apparently capable aerospace industry...why?



There are multiple potential rationales:
- Politics: it wouldn't hurt the Chinese to give Russians the needed capital in exchange for a set of capable (albeit redundant) fighters
- Engines: the 117S engine is still something the Chinese seem to be very interested in
- Energy deals: it is not unrealistic to think that Moscow hasn't thought of making gas/energy deals contingent upon a Su-35 purchase
- Aggressor training: the reasoning here would be similar to that of the USAF purchasing Kfirs and J-7s

Of course, the deal is still unconfirmed at this point.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## xunzi

I'm concerned about our development for the first time. I'm not going to lie. There are two schools of thought. If this deal intent for us to fill the gap in airpower, then this deal is like a bow cross my heart. It is a fucking disgrace and whoever responsible for the J-11 should look in the mirror. If this deal intent for dissecting Russian latest tech, then it worth's every penny. I am always said no matter how much we progress, we MUST always seek to learn from others. It is going through learning and understand of other tech system can we dream of ever creating a Monster Beast of a Machine. I am hoping this deal intent for the latter, then there is no price to learn.


----------



## Dungeness

egodoc222 said:


> Still you didn't answer my question...why buy? When you claim your aerospace industry is better than Russia's....why buy a 4++ gen fighter when you have j30 and apparently capable aerospace industry...why?



Just like the self claimed IT Superpower needs to import millions of smartphones from China, everybody needs something from others. Besides, nobody claims that China's aerospace industries better than Russia's.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

j20blackdragon said:


> Several things do not make sense.
> 
> Why develop the J-11D first and then buy the Su-35 later?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why upgrade the Su-30MK2 to a PL-12 standard if Russian radar/avionics and weapons are so good? I'm sure Russia would love to sell more R-77s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The J-20 does not require the 117S. These mysterious black engines were unveiled a week before Xi Jinping visited Washington in September this year, obviously as a form of muscle flexing in front of Obama. They are clearly not AL-31FN.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AL-31FN looks like this. I'm sure we've all seen enough J-10 pictures to know what the AL-31FN looks like by now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only explanation that would make sense is that China wants to buy 24 Su-35s to form an aggressor squadron. What's the point of buying a foreign fighter that can't even datalink with Chinese AEW&C aircraft?



The J-11D is also using the WS-10B engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cnleio

egodoc222 said:


> Still you didn't answer my question...why buy? *When you claim your aerospace industry is better than Russia's*....why buy a 4++ gen fighter when you have j30 and apparently capable aerospace industry...why?


LOL ... i hear the b@llsh!t from a Indian, who tell u that ? Nobody forbide China to import jet from Russia, does this need a reason ? IAF imported hundred fighters from Russia, need a reason why ?



Ind4Ever said:


> Apart from being very alarming in an Indian and American point of view. Where are those cheerleaders who said this deal don't exist and China won't buy 4++ generation fighter anymore? Looks like this number could go way beyond 24 and could reach a century or so.
> 
> What it really mean for people of China?
> 
> 1) Insecurity of current Chinese made aircraft is given
> 
> 2) Chinese leaders themselves don't think China is in position to go for war with current capabilities. Think about it. What if Vietnam gets Su35 or what will be the reaction in China establishment when India signs deals for PakFa and lay down the ground work for FGFA. This deal as put China atleast 15 years backwards.
> 
> 3) Chinese claims of having in-house capacity to produce world class weapons is seriously scrutinized. Check below listing :
> 
> China's best engine : imported from Russia. Works for indegineous engine (Literally a Ripoff) going on for more than 30 years.
> 
> China's best war ship? Designed and built in China by Russians
> 
> China's best cruise missiles. An Soviet Union Ripoff
> 
> China's missile force : Soviet and current Russians technology and with more Ripoff.
> 
> China's best Attack helicopters : Secretly signed deal with Russia to design and build in China. Even India is in the verge to cracking world's most powerful Light attack choppers.
> 
> List Is soo on. If this goes through, it will hurt the morale of Chinese armed forces and more over people on China. As we all know Chinese armed procurements are largely indulged in corrupt practices. Just pay a lump they will buy your weapon in large numbers and officials push for export for more kickbacks.
> 
> Am I wrong in looking at this deal in this manner? As I already said. It's gonna be a huge blow to our power-packed buildup against China at borders and at SCS. Now US airforce can't claim that in just a week 2 fleet of USAF can wipe 50% Chinese Aircrafts at will. As Russians built these tech while keeping American massive numbers and avionics superiority.
> 
> Now my fingers crossed for PakFa and much rumoured Su35S and super Sukois upgrades goes through before end of this year.


That's great, u r the BOSS of AVIC pls tell us more about how Chinese design aircrafts in China ... Here im feel pity for ur guys, talking too much b@llsh!t on internet, and joke in real world.


I repeat it again, PLAAF to build a 1,000x 4gen-5gen fighter fleet in China ... the reason why we need many China-produced and Russia-produced new modern fighters in futuer years. If here Indian members still can't understand it, that's indeed not my fault coz lack of foresight. Time is the most important thing for China development, both sides produce can save many time and the price is Okay. Does the enemy care how many Made in China or Made in Russia 4gen-5gen fighters in PLAAF ? Go to hell as many as we can !


BTW How many India arms export to foreign nations each year, compared with China international weapon business ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kurutoga

xunzi said:


> I'm concerned about our development for the first time. I'm not going to lie. There are two schools of thought. If this deal intent for us to fill the gap in airpower, then this deal is like a bow cross my heart. It is a fucking disgrace and whoever responsible for the J-11 should look in the mirror. If this deal intent for dissecting Russian latest tech, then it worth's every penny. I am always said no matter how much we progress, we MUST always seek to learn from others. It is going through learning and understand of other tech system can we dream of ever creating a Monster Beast of a Machine. I am hoping this deal intent for the latter, then there is no price to learn.



Do you remember the first report from Su-35 air show demonstrations? Some people from Chinese Air Force were so impressed by that jet's maneuverability. They may just have to buy to take a closer look. You have to understand the same group of people were so much stronger in 1980s. Now they are in the minority. Military is not a single-minded entity but a collection of many groups and some of them have different preferences. If one group is determined to buy some Su-35, they will create some legit reasons, not based on actual combat capabilities, for spending the money.

However, if Su-35 turns out to be a disappointment, I think this would be the end of Russian jet import.


----------



## xunzi

kurutoga said:


> Do you remember the first report from Su-35 air show demonstrations? Some people from Chinese Air Force were so impressed by that jet's maneuverability. They may just have to buy to take a closer look. You have to understand the same group of people were so much stronger in 1980s. Now they are in the minority. Military is not a single-minded entity but a collection of many groups and some of them have different preferences. If one group is determined to buy some Su-35, they will create some legit reasons, not based on actual combat capabilities, for spending the money.
> 
> However, if Su-35 turns out to be a disappointment, I think this would be the end of Russian jet import.


No matter what reason, the leadership must take responsible and accountable to give China the best chance to win a war. As I have said, if getting this deal will further down improve our ability to create a .monster of a beast, then it worths every pennies. People are not going to be happy to see wasting billions just so some Air FoFCe squadron wants to play with Su35.

As Xi have said, no time to play around. We need to put extra effort in current jet development.


----------



## Sasquatch

Is it possible these could be transferred to Pakistan some time later ? Only thing worth wild on it is the 117s Engines ?

@ChineseTiger1986 @Beast

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

There are some facts
1. SU 35 is better than any type of Chinese aircraft atm.
2. 24x is the normal qty for first order. Study this and you find most of first order always like that. 
3. Delivery time is not tomorrow or next year.
4. Spare parts, weapons purchase, maintenance facility.. Are essential for any type of aircraft.
5. Russia must have better aircraft on hands


----------



## cnleio

BoQ77 said:


> There are some facts
> 1. SU 35 is better than any type of Chinese aircraft atm.
> 2. 24x is the normal qty for first order. Study this and you find most of first order always like that.
> 3. Delivery time is not tomorrow or next year.
> 4. Spare parts, weapons purchase, maintenance facility.. Are essential for any type of aircraft.
> 5. Russia must have better aircraft on hands


Ur fact is nothing ... don't simply make the conclusion for China. U don't read the agreement in Moscow ... just watch this thread, didn't u already make many conclusions in this place ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Akasa

BoQ77 said:


> 1. SU 35 is better than any type of Chinese aircraft atm.



Highly doubtful; the J-11D and J-16 feature the same kind of upgrade scheme as that of the Su-35, such as airframe and electronic enhancements, but also with an AESA radar. The J-20 should also start LRIP in 2016.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

Hu Songshan said:


> Is it possible these could be transferred to Pakistan some time later ? Only thing worth wild on it is the 117s Engines ?
> 
> @ChineseTiger1986 @Beast


Maybe but the problem is Russia now has directly contact Pakistan for armed deal and the possibility of Using China as middle man for Su-35 looks less remote.


----------



## BoQ77

SinoSoldier said:


> Highly doubtful; the J-11D and J-16 feature the same kind of upgrade scheme as that of the Su-35, such as airframe and electronic enhancements, but also with an AESA radar. The J-20 should also start LRIP in 2016.



Yeah you could doubt anything, so do I.
There's chance that J-11D, J-16, J20 developers can't make sure about the time of mass production.
A design always look advance in paper, the real performance is more important, and it seem that they can't make sure that on J-11D, J16, J20, J31... atm.
While Su-35 is the lively advanced design, although it's not new.

24x Su-35, equally an air squadron quantity, similar to S-300/S-400 purchase, could deploy to the most important site of China.
If the performance of Su-35 is as expected, we could expect there's next orders.
24x is normal quantity for first order.

And I am wrong to conclude Su-35 delivered on or about 2018-2020.
Maybe China ordered small quantity 24x for fast delivery, we expect in 2017.



> In 1991 China purchased an initial batch of 24 *single-seat* SU-27s for about $1 billion which were delivered in late 1992 and based at Wuhu Air Base, 250 kilometers west of Shanghai. In May 1995 China purchased a second batch of 24 SU-27 aircraft through Russia's main state-run arms exporting company Rosvooruzheniye. These were delivered in April 1996 and based at Suixi Air Base in Southern China.


----------



## Economic superpower

BoQ77 said:


> There are some facts
> 1. SU 35 is better than any type of Chinese aircraft atm.
> 2. 24x is the normal qty for first order. Study this and you find most of first order always like that.
> 3. Delivery time is not tomorrow or next year.
> 4. Spare parts, weapons purchase, maintenance facility.. Are essential for any type of aircraft.
> 5. Russia must have better aircraft on hands



Those are all strawman arguments, not facts. Don't pretend you're not trolling, when you clearly are.


----------



## BoQ77

BoQ77 said:


> There are some facts
> 1. SU 35 is better than any type of Chinese aircraft atm.
> 2. 24x is the normal qty for first order. Study this and you find most of first order always like that.
> 3. Delivery time is not tomorrow or next year.
> 4. Spare parts, weapons purchase, maintenance facility.. Are essential for any type of aircraft.
> 5. Russia must have better aircraft on hands





cnleio said:


> Ur fact is nothing ... don't simply make the conclusion for China. U don't read the agreement in Moscow ... just watch this thread, didn't u already make many conclusions in this place ?





Economic superpower said:


> Those are all strawman arguments, not facts. Don't pretend you're not trolling, when you clearly are.



Let write your own arguments.


----------



## Economic superpower

BoQ77 said:


> Let write your own arguments.



Don't need to, you only troll so no point having proper arguments with a troll.

You have been banned numerous times for trolling which is why you're too scared to come to China & Far East section.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

Economic superpower said:


> Don't need to, you only troll so no point having proper arguments with a troll.
> 
> You have been banned numerous times for trolling which is why you're too scared to come to China & Far East section.



You are trolling here.


----------



## Economic superpower

BoQ77 said:


> You are trolling here.



Pot calling the kettle black.


----------



## Akasa

BoQ77 said:


> Yeah you could doubt anything, so do I.
> There's chance that J-11D, J-16, J20 developers can't make sure about the time of mass production.
> A design always look advance in paper, the real performance is more important, and it seem that they can't make sure that on J-11D, J16, J20, J31... atm.
> While Su-35 is the lively advanced design, although it's not new.
> 
> 24x Su-35, equally an air squadron quantity, similar to S-300/S-400 purchase, could deploy to the most important site of China.
> If the performance of Su-35 is as expected, we could expect there's next orders.
> 24x is normal quantity for first order.
> 
> And I am wrong to conclude Su-35 delivered on or about 2018-2020.
> Maybe China ordered small quantity 24x for fast delivery, we expect in 2017.



Nothing suggests that the engineers aren't confident in the performance of the J-11D, J-16, or J-20? Likewise, nothing hints that their specifications aren't how they appear on paper.


----------



## BoQ77

SinoSoldier said:


> Nothing suggests that the engineers aren't confident in the performance of the J-11D, J-16, or J-20? Likewise, nothing hints that their specifications aren't how they appear on paper.



Yes. But they are not DONE.
So why we don't make a guess. When China DONE 24X of J-11D, J-16, J-20 ?


----------



## Akasa

BoQ77 said:


> Yes. But it's not DONE.
> So why we don't make a guess. When China DONE 24X of J-11D, J-16, J-20 ?



J-16 is being built while J-11D and J-20 are in testing. That's irrelevant to your previous point.


----------



## BoQ77

SinoSoldier said:


> J-16 is being built while J-11D and J-20 are in testing. That's irrelevant to your previous point.



You misunderstand that I said any design with optimum parameters always come first on paper, developers would try their best to make them real, and it takes time to do so. Now we don't know how much time for those to be DONE.

The duration could be few years, 10 years or decades.
So we can't claim an incomplete design is better or equal to an existed design. Even F-15 vs Su-30, Su-35 ... it's hard to make conclusion.

Another fact, the best fighters could defend China today or tomorrow is Su-30MK2, also come with quantity 24x. To outsiders, J-16 is copy variant of Su-30MK2 which was delivered to China 12 years ago. While Su-35 is modernized variant of Su-27/Su-30.


----------



## Akasa

BoQ77 said:


> You misunderstand that I said any design with optimum parameters always come first on paper, developers would try their best to make them real, and it takes time to do so. Now we don't know how much time for those to be DONE.
> 
> The duration could be few years, 10 years or decades.
> So we can't claim an incomplete design is better or equal to an existed design. Even F-15 vs Su-30, Su-35 ... it's hard to make conclusion.



It is already real. The J-11X and 5th gen fighters are all flying.



BoQ77 said:


> Another fact, the best fighters could defend China today or tomorrow is Su-30MK2, also come with quantity 24x. To outsiders, J-16 is copy variant of Su-30MK2 which was delivered to China 12 years ago. While Su-35 is modernized variant of Su-27/Su-30.



The Su-30MK2 have been superseded by the J-16, J-15S, and even JH-7A in some respects.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

SinoSoldier said:


> It is already real. The J-11X and 5th gen fighters are all flying.
> 
> 
> 
> The Su-30MK2 have been superseded by the J-16, J-15S, and even JH-7A in some respects.



Red can't prove they are flying at optimum configuration. And they aren't. Like Pak-FA has been flying for a while.





Blue "aspects" ? how you know? btw, "some aspects" can't make them looks clearly better than 24x Su-30MK2 serving in an air squadron.


----------



## Akasa

BoQ77 said:


> Red can't prove they are flying at optimum configuration. And they aren't.
> Blue "aspects" ? how you know? btw, "some aspects" can't make them looks clearly better than 24x Su-30MK2 serving in an air squadron.



What is "optimum configuration"? "In some respects" was what I said, because while the Su-30MK2 is still serving in the PLAN, their role has been gradually dimished and superseded by front-line aircraft such as the J-11BH, J-15S, J-16, or JH-7A.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

SinoSoldier said:


> What is "optimum configuration"? "In some respects" was what I said, because while the Su-30MK2 is still serving in the PLAN, their role has been gradually dimished and superseded by front-line aircraft such as the J-11BH, J-15S, J-16, or JH-7A.



So it's time for order 24x Su-35 as replacement of 24x Su-30MK2 as best ones to counter next year Japanese F-35


----------



## Viper0011.

tony singh said:


> China has resumed negotiations with Russia over the purchase of "4++ generation" Sukhoi Su-35 multirole fighters. Although Moscow and Beijing had been discussing a deal for over two years, China halted the process for several months after details of the talks appeared in the Russian media.
> 
> AIRSHOW CHINA: China resumes talks with Russia on Su-35 purchase



The contract has either been signed, or about to be signed on this. Worth, over $ 2+ billion and for an initial order of 24 jets, with more as an option later.


----------



## BoQ77

SinoSoldier said:


> What is "optimum configuration"? "In some respects" was what I said, because while the Su-30MK2 is still serving in the PLAN, their role has been gradually dimished and superseded by front-line aircraft such as the J-11BH, J-15S, J-16, or JH-7A.



What's the air squadron of PLAAF, PLANAF has better fighters than the one with Su-30MK2 ?
The air squadron with Su-35 will be the strongest air squadron.


----------



## Deino

BoQ77 said:


> What's the air squadron of PLAAF, PLANAF has better fighters than the one with Su-30MK2 ?
> The air squadron with Su-35 will be the strongest air squadron.
> 
> Vietnam now has 3 air squadrons with Su-30MK2



And that's more than irrelevant to bring each and every time into treads, what Vietnam has !!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BoQ77

Deino said:


> And that's more than irrelevant to bring each and every time into treads, what Vietnam has !!



I deleted that, but I want to ask you one question "to where China would put their Su-35 once they get them?"

Countries build or purchase their weapons to counter threats to their interests, not for show !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

BoQ77 said:


> What's the air squadron of PLAAF, PLANAF has better fighters than the one with Su-30MK2 ?



Not quite sure about which squadrons, but multiple ones have been formed that use the aforementioned aircraft.



BoQ77 said:


> The air squadron with Su-35 will be the strongest air squadron.



Unlikely. PLAAF squadrons have an equal number of planes.


----------



## victor07

SinoSoldier said:


> Highly doubtful; the J-11D and J-16 feature the same kind of upgrade scheme as that of the Su-35, such as airframe and electronic enhancements, but also with an AESA radar. The J-20 should also start LRIP in 2016.


The same kind of upgrade scheme? How? From where China may have the knowledge of Su-35 upgrade decisions and all spectrum of used technologies? Twitter? Newspapers? Air Shows? So upgrade scheme may be similar, not same.
Airframe... Are Chinese technologies, knowledge and experience mature enough to develop own airframe for heavy fighter, equal to the best world standards, without relying on samples? Some doubts.
AESA... Problem is not in AESA vs PESA, it is in maturity of technology, including signal processing algorithms, detection and recognition of targets, weapons control, and hence, => combat capabilities. And also do not forget maintenance. Failure of such a system like radar in a combat means death. Su-35 uses mature system with capabilities equal or better to other modern combat aircrafts of the same generation.
The same is true for engines.
So if the deal will be implemented, Su-35 for China may be seen as a platform for verification and validation of current projects J-11, ..., etc.


----------



## Sanchez

victor07 said:


> The same kind of upgrade scheme? How? From where China may have the knowledge of Su-35 upgrade decisions and all spectrum of used technologies? Twitter? Newspapers? Air Shows? So upgrade scheme may be similar, not same.
> Airframe... Are Chinese technologies, knowledge and experience mature enough to develop own airframe for heavy fighter, equal to the best world standards, without relying on samples? Some doubts.
> AESA... Problem is not in AESA vs PESA, it is in maturity of technology, including signal processing algorithms, detection and recognition of targets, weapons control, and hence, => combat capabilities. And also do not forget maintenance. Failure of such a system like radar in a combat means death. Su-35 uses mature system with capabilities equal or better to other modern combat aircrafts of the same generation.
> The same is true for engines.
> So if the deal will be implemented, Su-35 for China may be seen as a platform for verification and validation of current projects J-11, ..., etc.



Are J-10 and J-20 not Chinese developed airframes? Is there anything similar to J-20? Has Russia walked away far beyond Su-27 airframe?

Chinese already mastered techs like signal processing algorithms, detection and recognition of targets, weapons control, and so on.

I think China wants to have a close look on those 117s engines to see if we could make a better WS-10 or the WS-15 for J-20.


----------



## nadeemkhan110

Russia is selling China high performance aircraft as an answer to America’s actions around Asia, Conn Hallinan from Foreign Policy in Focus, told RT.
Beijing has signed a deal with Moscow for Sukhoi fighter jets. China will buy 24 cutting-edge SU-35s. China is the first foreign sale of the multipurpose aircraft.



*RT:* _Officials from Beijing were first shown the fighter jet seven years ago at an air show in China. What do you think is behind the timing of the decision to buy these planes?_

*Dr. Conn Hallinnan:* Well, it is not exactly the same fighter jet. They took the old Su-35, which I believe the NATO designation was Flanker, and they essentially redesigned it. So it is faster, it has got longer range, more capabilities and can carry more ordinance, etc. I think it is very much a kind of an answer…

President Obama was in Asia recently, and he announced $250 million to various countries in South East Asia: Indonesia, Japan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia to buy and get American military hardware. And I think that the announcement of this sale is sort of the counter. In other words, if you give all the stuff to your potential allies, then what we’re doing is giving one of our high performance aircraft - interceptors and fighter bombers - to China. It’s sort of an answer to the US F-35 moving to Asia and the SU-35 is a good match for the F-35.

*RT:* _What message could this send to China's rivals in the region, particularly Japan?_

*Dr. CH:* I think that Japan yes, but I also think there is South Korean, there is Australia. What is happening here is the Chinese have been pushing very hard in the South China Sea, a little too hard in my opinion; I think they’ve stirred up unnecessary antagonism. But what they are responding to… is the fact that they look around, and what they see is that from India to South Korea and Japan the US has ringed them with potential adversaries. And this purchase of the Sukhoi is an answer to that. The SU-35 is better than anything right now in the Chinese air force. It is faster than the F-35, and it has got greater range than the F-35; it’s more flexible in terms of what it can do; it doesn’t have stealth capacity, but stealth capacity is overrated in any case.

*RT: *_As you said Washington is planning to boost its presence in the Asia-Pacific with the latest generation of aircraft and warships within the next few years. What reaction can we expect from the US now?_

*Dr. CH:* I suspect what you are going to see is a sort of a pushback. I think that Russia is in part doing that in Syria, and I think the Chinese are doing it in the South China Sea, and to a certain extent in South Asia... The US has been pushing, and I think you’re going to see the Russians and the Chinese begin to push back a little bit more. We hope, of course, this doesn’t get into a serious phase. I’m always nervous when you have high-performance aircraft that have the potential to start an incident





SU-35 © Vladimir Voskresensky / Sputnik
What this very much is is China and Russia’s answer to the past two decades: NATO moving Eastward, the Georgia war, the Yugoslav war, the attempt at a Ukraine coup, an attempt to overthrow the Assad regime in Syria, and at the same time a lot of US pressure in the Philippines, Japan, Vietnam, etc. sort of bumping up against the Chinese. What you seeing here is a kind of a worldwide picture – it is not really derestricted to the Asian Pacific region.

*RT:* _We also know that China is developing its own fifth-generation fighter jet, the Chengdu J-20. Do you expect the country to continue to buy Russian military hardware in the future, or they will go with their own?_

*Dr. CH:* I think it is actually in the interest of the Chinese to do so. In other words, the Chinese are developing their own aircraft, but the SU-35 is a relatively inexpensive airplane – it is only something like $63-65 million apiece. You compare that to something like the F-35 which is between $98 million and about $110 million apiece. It is a pretty good deal for China. Also China is putting a lot of their resources at this point into their maritime forces and they are expensive. So if you can get an airplane that is a solid airplane, easy to maintain, has good capabilities for pretty much bargain basement prices it’d be silly not to take it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Bussard Ramjet

Ind4Ever said:


> LOL now who is big joke? The point is when you claim super fighter and one fighter J10B can beat and superior to all available 4 gen fighters like Sukois rafale F15 etc, when your big mouthed defence experts says J20 and J31 is the best attack 5th gen fighter available why could they need mere number of 24 su35? You just give me one good reason why u are buying 24 Su 35? For fun
> 
> Or like some moron said that it's for aggressor squadrons. What a joke. So su35 is for aggressor squadron and j11 j20 j10 are for kissing and cuddling squadron?



I think you are unnecessarily aggressive and dismissive. 

There are many plausible reasons why Su 35 were bought, some being: 


To get hold of engines. 
To compensate for the lack of enough production capacity to produce J11 etc. (China has limited production capacity, which can be augmented by buying from abroad) 
A hidden tacit quid pro quo kind of deal. (Russians want to sell Su 35 desperately, and if China were to be a customer, it will dramatically raise the profile of the jet. Maybe they had a deal with the Chinese, that they will help China with engine tech, in exchange of support for weapon purchases)


----------



## j20blackdragon

China has no need for Russian radar, avionics, and weapons. I'll post some evidence to support this.

L-15 has PESA.






J-10B/C has shown both PESA and AESA.










J-11D has AESA.






J-20 has shown a dedicated AESA Tu-204C testbed.






The Su-30MKK has been shown to carry a Chinese KG600 pod. This indicates a willingness to swap out Russian avionics in favor of Chinese. This would not happen if Russian avionics were superior.






The Su-30MK2 has been shown carrying PL-12. Once again, this indicates a willingness to swap out Russian avionics in favor of Chinese. This would not happen if Russian avionics were superior.






A Su-35 without modifications most likely cannot datalink with the brand new KJ-500 AEW&C aircraft.






The PL-15 is good enough to worry the U.S. Air Force. Gen. Herbert Carlisle has openly expressed concern regarding this missile. A Su-35 without modifications most likely cannot use the PL-15.

The New Chinese Missile That Has the U.S. Air Force Spooked - The Daily Beast

So how in the world do we explain this ridiculous Su-35 purchase?

I'm not saying the Su-35 deal didn't happen. I'm just saying it doesn't make any sense to me, especially considering the steep price tag of $83 million per aircraft. There has to be something else about this deal we're not seeing.


----------



## cnleio

Ind4Ever said:


> LOL now who is big joke? The point is when you claim super fighter and one fighter J10B can beat and superior to all available 4 gen fighters like Sukois rafale F15 etc, when your big mouthed defence experts says J20 and J31 is the best attack 5th gen fighter available why could they need mere number of 24 su35? You just give me one good reason why u are buying 24 Su 35? For fun


Indian ! Give me the post link when & who say that in PDF ? Is the words from ur mouth, or *Are you just jealous of Chinese JF-17/J-10A/J-10B/J-11B/J-11D/J-15/J-16/J-20/J-31 doing better than ur LCA ?*  show me .




Ind4Ever said:


> Or like some moron said that it's for aggressor squadrons. What a joke. So su35 is for aggressor squadron and j11 j20 j10 are for kissing and cuddling squadron?


Why not ? Su-35 in aggressor squadron this plan sounds very good ... 24x Su-35 vs J-11B/D、J-10A/B、J-15、J-20. As far as i knew current PLAAF aggressor squadron using J-11 and Su-30mkk as the "Enemy", Su-35 is good enough to train our fighter pilots.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cnleio

Russian official news report Sino-Russia Su-35 deal, 2016 next year delivery first Su-35 fighter to China
MOSCOW, November 20. /TASS/. The first batch of Russia’s Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets will be supplied to China in 2016, a source in the system of military and technical cooperation told TASS on Friday.

"The first fighter jets will arrive for China in 2016," the source said.

It was reported on Thursday that Russia had signed a contract on the delivery of 24 Su-35 fighter jets to China. The deal is estimated at no less than $2 billion and also envisages the delivery of ground support equipment and reserve aircraft engines.

A source in the system of military and technical cooperation told TASS earlier on Friday that the contract would be implemented over the next there years.


----------



## BoQ77

cnleio said:


> Russian official news report Sino-Russia Su-35 deal, 2016 next year delivery first Su-35 fighter to China
> MOSCOW, November 20. /TASS/. The first batch of Russia’s Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets will be supplied to China in 2016, a source in the system of military and technical cooperation told TASS on Friday.
> 
> "The first fighter jets will arrive for China in 2016," the source said.
> 
> It was reported on Thursday that Russia had signed a contract on the delivery of 24 Su-35 fighter jets to China. The deal is estimated at no less than $2 billion and also envisages the delivery of ground support equipment and reserve aircraft engines.
> 
> A source in the system of military and technical cooperation told TASS earlier on Friday that the contract would be implemented over the next there years.
> View attachment 273524



SO I am wrong and right.
First I guess delivery during 2018- 2020. But I admit I am wrong and make a guess China ordered 24 as small order for fast delivery, likely at the end of 2016 or early in 2017.
The time F35 coming to JAPAN.

And there will be order for next batch.


----------



## cnleio

BoQ77 said:


> SO I am wrong and right.
> First I guess delivery during 2018- 2020. But I admit I am wrong and make a guess China ordered 24 as small order for fast delivery, likely at the end of 2016 or early in 2017.
> The time F35 coming to JAPAN.
> 
> And there will be order for next batch.


The time F35 coming to JAPAN, J-20A serving in PLAAF, that time will be 800+ 4gen~5gen fighters in 2017 China, that's my answer to u. Mr Leio don't talk groundless words in PDF.


----------



## terranMarine

So when will Vietnam get any 5 gen fighters?


----------



## Inception-06

cnleio said:


> The time F35 coming to JAPAN, J-20A serving in PLAAF, that time will be 800+ 4gen~5gen fighters in 2017 China, that's my answer to u. Mr Leio don't talk groundless words in PDF.




Is 24 not a very low number, compared to the size of China and the threat ? Why not 50 ? China has a strong economy and lacks not in resources and funds.


----------



## cnleio

Ulla said:


> Is 24 not a very low number, compared to the size of China and the threat ? Why not 50 ? China has a strong economy and lacks not in resources and funds.


Su-35 is not the necessary for China, and Russia only provide 10x Su-35 per year to China during 2016-2018 coz they also need produce new Su-35 for Russia Airforce and other customers. I had said China ordered 117S jet engines more than numbers of Su-35 ... Su-35 isn't the importance in this deal. U should read TASS news carefully there's a unknown amount of reserve aircraft engines inside this deal, that's what China want.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Inception-06

cnleio said:


> Su-35 is not the necessary for China, and Russia only provide 10x Su-35 per year to China during 2016-2018 coz they also need produce new Su-35 for Russia Airforce and other customers. I had said China ordered 117S jet engines more than numbers of Su-35 ... Su-35 isn't the importance in this deal. U should read TASS news carefully there's a unknown amount of reserve aircraft engines inside this deal, that's what China want.



I did read it, thx for Reply

How man J-10 and Su-27 series (J-11 etc.) China can produce per year ?


----------



## cnleio

Ulla said:


> I did read it, thx for Reply
> 
> How man J-10 and Su-27 series (J-11 etc.) China can produce per year ?


LOL ... it's a sensitive data. Since 2004 J-10 & J-11 ... u can do a math by below map.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

victor07 said:


> The same kind of upgrade scheme? How? From where China may have the knowledge of Su-35 upgrade decisions and all spectrum of used technologies? Twitter? Newspapers? Air Shows? So upgrade scheme may be similar, not same.



I used the term "scheme", which refers to a broad trend in subsystems upgrades. For example, both Su-35 and the J-11D feature avionics upgrades, extensive airframe enhancements, upgraded EW/ECM suites, and engine upgrades. This in no way implies that the subsystems themselves are the same or even that the spectrum of upgrades are exactly equal, but rather that the two aircraft focus on the same areas of improvements.



victor07 said:


> Airframe... Are Chinese technologies, knowledge and experience mature enough to develop own airframe for heavy fighter, equal to the best world standards, without relying on samples? Some doubts.



The Chinese have been developing, designing, building, and retrofitting Flanker variants for over 17 years now; there is no reason to doubt their familiarity with the Flanker airframe.



victor07 said:


> AESA... Problem is not in AESA vs PESA, it is in maturity of technology, including signal processing algorithms, detection and recognition of targets, weapons control, and hence, => combat capabilities. And also do not forget maintenance. Failure of such a system like radar in a combat means death. Su-35 uses mature system with capabilities equal or better to other modern combat aircrafts of the same generation.



Fair enough, but my point was that the J-11D should be very similar to the Su-35 in this regard, thus ruling out the possibility that the Chinese are buying the Su-35 (again, assuming that rumors are true) due to a gap in capability. My post was specifically referring to the subsystems aboard J-11D/Su-35, not necessarily the maintenance requirements for them, which depends on a host of factors beyond R&D and manufacturing.



victor07 said:


> The same is true for engines.
> So if the deal will be implemented, Su-35 for China may be seen as a platform for verification and validation of current projects J-11, ..., etc.



I'm not sure what you mean by "verification" or "validation", but I agree, the Chinese enginers and PLAAF brass are probably very eager to compare notes with their Russian counterparts, especially when they plan to operate domestic fighters that are very similar to the Su-35 such as the J-11D/J-16.


----------



## Beast

24 Su-35 will joined PAF soon through Chinese purchase


----------



## BoQ77

cnleio said:


> The time F35 coming to JAPAN, J-20A serving in PLAAF, that time will be 800+ 4gen~5gen fighters in 2017 China, that's my answer to u. Mr Leio don't talk groundless words in PDF.



No one in J20 project could assure what Leio just wished.

That why Su 35 coming to China

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

BoQ77 said:


> No one in J20 project could assure what Leio just wished.
> 
> That why Su 35 coming to China



24 Su-35s would barely make a difference. There is no reason to assume that the PLAAF is interested due to a delay or inability in its other fighters.


----------



## cnleio

BoQ77 said:


> No one in J20 project could assure what Leio just wished.
> 
> That why Su 35 coming to China


LOL ... Su-35 China will get, J-20A China also mass production, J-10B/C mass production, J-11D also will mass production, J-15 mass production, J-16 will mass production, J-31 also has the chance and i knew they had built new assembly lines for them ... it's not Leio's simple wish, Did u ever hear what called '*Schedules*' in Vietnam ? Next years the job of AVIC Group just producing above fighters in China as many as we can ... i ever said many times in PDF 'the winter is coming', it's true China need more modern fighters to protect us and to face future challenges from foreign. One thing i can sure 2017~2018 J-20A serving in PLAAF.

Each time the world economy get crashed, the more chance world get into a big war ... Obviously Chinese have foresight longer than others, and prepare well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

SinoSoldier said:


> 24 Su-35s would barely make a difference. There is no reason to assume that the PLAAF is interested due to a delay or inability in its other fighters.



24 Su 35 is comparable to Liaoning in optimum config operating in near sea, focus on Su35 longer range. 

Of course Su 35 squadrons are stronger than any other squadrons China has before 2021. new weapons with Su35 is significant


----------



## Akasa

BoQ77 said:


> Of course Su 35 squadrons are stronger than any other squadrons China has before 2021.



PLAAF squadrons have the same number of aircraft, so no single squadron is "stronger".


----------



## BoQ77

SinoSoldier said:


> PLAAF squadrons have the same number of aircraft, so no single squadron is "stronger".


 
Dont catch what you mean? Squadron with J8 vs Squadron with Su 30?



cnleio said:


> LOL ... Su-35 China will get, J-20A China also mass production, J-10B/C mass production, J-11D also will mass production, J-15 mass production, J-16 will mass production, J-31 also has the chance and i knew they had built new assembly lines for them ... it's not Leio's simple wish, Did u ever hear what called '*Schedules*' in Vietnam ? Next years the job of AVIC Group just producing above fighters in China as many as we can ... i ever said many times in PDF 'the winter is coming', it's true China need more modern fighters to protect us and to face future challenges from foreign. One thing i can sure 2017~2018 J-20A serving in PLAAF.
> 
> Each time the world economy get crashed, the more chance world get into a big war ... Obviously Chinese have foresight longer than others, and prepare well.



Optimistic is good for health.



SinoSoldier said:


> 24 Su-35s would barely make a difference. There is no reason to assume that the PLAAF is interested due to a delay or inability in its other fighters.



The problem is the strongest ones could fight now must be Su 30mk2 may unable to catch up new appearance in ECS and SCS. 
Like Indonesia Su 35, US Marine F35B, Japan F35A, Vietnam Su 30SM

The purchase is good for China, I admit.
We dont worry about any Jxx but Su35.


----------



## Akasa

BoQ77 said:


> Dont catch what you mean? Squadron with J8 vs Squadron with Su 30?



What do you mean?



BoQ77 said:


> The problem is the strongest ones could fight now must be Su 30mk2 may unable to catch up new appearance in ECS and SCS.
> Like Indonesia Su 35, US Marine F35B, Japan F35A, Vietnam Su 30SM
> 
> The purchase is good for China, I admit.
> We dont worry about any Jxx but Su35.



Uh, no, the "strongest" aircraft within the PLANAF are the J-11B and J-15.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cnleio

BoQ77 said:


> Optimistic is good for health.


Schedule is the schedule, China won't delay it ... i won't waste my time in the thread, what i mentioned here soon come true in 2017, just get my point and don't forget see photos in my thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## victor07

Sanchez said:


> Are J-10 and J-20 not Chinese developed airframes? Is there anything similar to J-20? Has Russia walked away far beyond Su-27 airframe?
> Chinese already mastered techs like signal processing algorithms, detection and recognition of targets, weapons control, and so on.
> I think China wants to have a close look on those 117s engines to see if we could make a better WS-10 or the WS-15 for J-20.





SinoSoldier said:


> I used the term "scheme", which refers to a broad trend in subsystems upgrades. For example, both Su-35 and the J-11D feature avionics upgrades, extensive airframe enhancements, upgraded EW/ECM suites, and engine upgrades. This in no way implies that the subsystems themselves are the same or even that the spectrum of upgrades are exactly equal, but rather that the two aircraft focus on the same areas of improvements.
> The Chinese have been developing, designing, building, and retrofitting Flanker variants for over 17 years now; there is no reason to doubt their familiarity with the Flanker airframe.
> Fair enough, but my point was that the J-11D should be very similar to the Su-35 in this regard, thus ruling out the possibility that the Chinese are buying the Su-35 (again, assuming that rumors are true) due to a gap in capability. My post was specifically referring to the subsystems aboard J-11D/Su-35, not necessarily the maintenance requirements for them, which depends on a host of factors beyond R&D and manufacturing.
> I'm not sure what you mean by "verification" or "validation", but I agree, the Chinese enginers and PLAAF brass are probably very eager to compare notes with their Russian counterparts, especially when they plan to operate domestic fighters that are very similar to the Su-35 such as the J-11D/J-16.


Chinese have been developing, designing, building, and retrofitting Flanker variants for over 17 years, but we do not see any difference between airframes of canonic Su-27 and the most modern Chinese J-11D. At the same time Su Design Bureau has developed a range of airframes: Su-30MKI, Su-34, Su-37(47) and of course Su-35. Visible differences between canonic 27 and current 35 are evident. 35 is unstable integral triplane with managed aerobatics without any restrictions on the angle of attack. Su27 is not and there is no evidences that J-11 is different from Su-27 in this. Furthermore 35 has reduced in X-band frontal RCS to approx. 1.5 m2 (Su-27 has about 15 m2). What about J-10 and J-20, isn't they developed with direct help from MiG Design Bureau (MiG LFI and MFI) and use of complete set of design docs for IAI Lavi ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

victor07 said:


> Chinese have been developing, designing, building, and retrofitting Flanker variants for over 17 years, but we do not see any difference between airframes of canonic Su-27 and the most modern Chinese J-11D.



That is because most of the upgrades are all internal; even the Su-35 shares a common airframe with the T-10-1 prototype. Internal upgrades account for almost all Flanker variants.



victor07 said:


> At the same time Su Design Bureau has developed a range of airframes: Su-30MKI, Su-34, Su-37(47) and of course Su-35. Visible differences between canonic 27 and current 35 are evident.



The Chinese have also developed the J-11B/D, J-15, J-15S, and J-16/11BS, every single one of which uses a different type of airframe.



victor07 said:


> 35 is unstable integral triplane with managed aerobatics without any restrictions on the angle of attack. Su27 is not and there is no evidences that J-11 is different from Su-27 in this. Furthermore 35 has reduced in X-band frontal RCS to approx. 1.5 m2 (Su-27 has about 15 m2).



How would you know that the J-11 cannot achieve a decent angle of attack? The J-11B/D have also reduced their RCS values by applying radar-absorbent material and composites.



victor07 said:


> What about J-10 and J-20, isn't they developed with direct help from MiG Design Bureau (MiG LFI and MFI) and use of complete set of design docs for IAI Lavi ?



The J-10 and J-20 have nothing to do with the Lavi and MiG, respectively..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sanchez

victor07 said:


> Chinese have been developing, designing, building, and retrofitting Flanker variants for over 17 years, but we do not see any difference between airframes of canonic Su-27 and the most modern Chinese J-11D. At the same time Su Design Bureau has developed a range of airframes: Su-30MKI, Su-34, Su-37(47) and of course Su-35. Visible differences between canonic 27 and current 35 are evident. 35 is unstable integral triplane with managed aerobatics without any restrictions on the angle of attack. Su27 is not and there is no evidences that J-11 is different from Su-27 in this. Furthermore 35 has reduced in X-band frontal RCS to approx. 1.5 m2 (Su-27 has about 15 m2). What about J-10 and J-20, isn't they developed with direct help from MiG Design Bureau (MiG LFI and MFI) and use of complete set of design docs for IAI Lavi ?



Can you tell the difference of J-16 from J-11D? You should also know that Chinese modified J-11B that is one metric ton less heavy than Su-27. J-11B/D, J-15 and J-16 all have reduced RCS known for years. Just look for more details of change.

Russian help on J-20 may have been through your meddling with MiG?


----------



## Beast

victor07 said:


> Chinese have been developing, designing, building, and retrofitting Flanker variants for over 17 years, but we do not see any difference between airframes of canonic Su-27 and the most modern Chinese J-11D. At the same time Su Design Bureau has developed a range of airframes: Su-30MKI, Su-34, Su-37(47) and of course Su-35. Visible differences between canonic 27 and current 35 are evident. 35 is unstable integral triplane with managed aerobatics without any restrictions on the angle of attack. Su27 is not and there is no evidences that J-11 is different from Su-27 in this. Furthermore 35 has reduced in X-band frontal RCS to approx. 1.5 m2 (Su-27 has about 15 m2). What about J-10 and J-20, isn't they developed with direct help from MiG Design Bureau (MiG LFI and MFI) and use of complete set of design docs for IAI Lavi ?









Official comfirmation of J-11B over Su-27SK improvement. 10000hrs lifespan airframe. 700kg lighter, can track 20 targets and attack 6 targets at the same time. Increase air to ground attack cpabilities which is absent from Su-27SK version.

MiG denies stealth technology transfer to China for J-20 fighter | Russia & India Report

Official statement from MiG deny any role for J-20. J-20 is a 100% Chinese independently develop program.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## victor07

SinoSoldier said:


> That is because most of the upgrades are all internal; even the Su-35 shares a common airframe with the T-10-1 prototype. Internal upgrades account for almost all Flanker variants.
> 
> 
> 
> The Chinese have also developed the J-11B/D, J-15, J-15S, and J-16/11BS, every single one of which uses a different type of airframe.
> 
> 
> 
> How would you know that the J-11 cannot achieve a decent angle of attack? The J-11B/D have also reduced their RCS values by applying radar-absorbent material and composites.
> 
> 
> 
> The J-10 and J-20 have nothing to do with the Lavi and MiG, respectively..


Good, let it be your way. Then it is not clear why China buy combat aircraft, if own is not worse. And then what about very strange fact. China is (by your words) is able to develop the most advanced modern combat aircrafts but somehow decides to buy documentation of Yak-130 and produce a copy instead of develop own one. I mean Hongdu L-15.




In addition can you link me to any clear video of aerobatic display of Chinese Flankers close to these videos of Su-34 frontline bomber (with and without armament):

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

victor07 said:


> Good, let it be your way. Then it is not clear why China buy combat aircraft, if own is not worse. And then what about very strange fact. China is (by your words) is able to develop the most advanced modern combat aircrafts but somehow decides to buy documentation of Yak-130 and produce a copy instead of develop own one. I mean Hongdu L-15.



Hongdu paid consultation fee to Yakolev. Of cos , if Yakolev advised Hongdu to design L-15 like their Yak-130 , its not the fault of the Chinese since Yakolev already received the fee.


----------



## Akasa

victor07 said:


> Good, let it be your way. Then it is not clear why China buy combat aircraft, if own is not worse. And then what about very strange fact.



There are a lot of reasons why the Chinese might want to buy Russian jets even with their domestic analogues:
- help out the crumbling Russian economy
- show solidarity with Russia
- aggressor training and/or evaluation
- 117S engines



victor07 said:


> China is (by your words) is able to develop the most advanced modern combat aircrafts but somehow decides to buy documentation of Yak-130 and produce a copy instead of develop own one. I mean Hongdu L-15.



Firstly, the L-15 design exhibits numerous differences vis-a-vis the Yak-130; the two are in no way copies by any definition of the term. Secondly, we do not know the extent to which Yakolev helped with the design, if at all, so it is far too premature to draw any connections between the Yak-130 and L-15. The fact that the Chinese were able to export the L-15 without any Russian objection also suggests that the supposed relationship between the two are a lot less significant than previously imagined.



victor07 said:


> In addition can you link me to any clear video of aerobatic display of Chinese Flankers close to these videos of Su-34 frontline bomber (with and without armament):



What would aerobatic maneuvers, especially when confined to the flight envelopes of airshows, prove?


----------



## victor07

SinoSoldier said:


> There are a lot of reasons why the Chinese might want to buy Russian jets even with their domestic analogues:
> - help out the crumbling Russian economy
> - show solidarity with Russia
> - aggressor training and/or evaluation
> - 117S engines
> Firstly, the L-15 design exhibits numerous differences vis-a-vis the Yak-130; the two are in no way copies by any definition of the term. Secondly, we do not know the extent to which Yakolev helped with the design, if at all, so it is far too premature to draw any connections between the Yak-130 and L-15. The fact that the Chinese were able to export the L-15 without any Russian objection also suggests that the supposed relationship between the two are a lot less significant than previously imagined.
> What would aerobatic maneuvers, especially when confined to the flight envelopes of airshows, prove?



Please do not show your incompetence. In order to help a country is usually given a long-term loan for a small percentage. China refused to give Russia a loan, furthermore China at all UN resolutions related to the interests of Russia, voted for own Chinese interests. Thus, there is nothing to do with "helping Russia" in our relations. Relations between Russia and China are determined only by their own interests and nothing else.
The contract value for the Russian economy is insignificant. At the same time, this contract together with other contracts allow the manufacturer to continue new projects like fifth-generation fighter and others in comfortable conditions. As for China's interest, I've expressed my opinion, you do not agree with it, but with no convincing arguments. Currently I see only one fully completed 100% Chinese project of military aircraft. It is the one that is produced in cooperation with Pakistan.
The changes in airframe to Chinese clone of Yak-130 affect only the addition of afterburners and appropriate account of this fact in the settings of the electronic control system (FBWCS). Is it possible that these changes are reflected in the performance of the aircraft for the worse? May be, but we do not know because we have not seen its aerobatics, as well as aerobatics of Chinese "Flankers" even with current engines.
"extent to which Yakolev helped with the design" of L-15 is a production documentation, which is openly stated in Russian Wiki.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

victor07 said:


> Please do not show your incompetence. In order to help a country is usually given a long-term loan for a small percentage. China refused to give Russia a loan, furthermore China at all UN resolutions related to the interests of Russia, voted for own Chinese interests.



What are you even talking about? Russia received $11.6 billion in loans from the Chinese for their non-financial sector alone, which is significant considering that almost every major Western body has emplaced economic sanctions on Russia and their foreign investments are falling faster than a rock in water. China also signed a $25 billion deal with Moscow, allowing Russian companies to borrow at lower interest rates than could Chinese domestic comapnies. You simply will not see that kind of financial relationship if China was simply going "by her own interests", especially with Russia's crumbling credit rating (which is below investment grade, by the way).



victor07 said:


> Thus, there is nothing to do with "helping Russia" in our relations. Relations between Russia and China are determined only by their own interests and nothing else.



And it is in the interest of the Chinese to see an economically-healthy Russia.



victor07 said:


> The contract value for the Russian economy is insignificant. At the same time, this contract together with other contracts allow the manufacturer to continue new projects like fifth-generation fighter and others in comfortable conditions.



There is no doubt that Russia will continue to pursue military projects, but whether they will be procured if the same numbers as when Russia had not undergone an economic recession is another question.



victor07 said:


> As for China's interest, I've expressed my opinion, you do not agree with it, but with no convincing arguments. Currently I see only one fully completed 100% Chinese project of military aircraft. It is the one that is produced in cooperation with Pakistan.



You are free to believe what you wish. It has no bearing on the reality that the Chinese have simultaneously developed multiple fighter families with top-of-the-line subsystems and the potential to take a portion of the export pie that had been previously dominated by the US and Russia.



victor07 said:


> The changes in airframe to Chinese clone of Yak-130 affect only the addition of afterburners and appropriate account of this fact in the settings of the electronic control system (FBWCS). Is it possible that these changes are reflected in the performance of the aircraft for the worse? May be, but we do not know because we have not seen its aerobatics, as well as aerobatics of Chinese "Flankers" even with current engines.



First of all, the L-15 isn't a "clone" of the Yak-130; the two shares many aerodynamic motifs but the trend exists in almost all major engineering projects. The term is referred to as "form following function". As stated before, the fact that the Chinese can export the L-15 without drawing any Russian ire suggests that there is not much of a relationship between the L-15 and Yak-130 than previously imagined.



victor07 said:


> "extent to which Yakolev helped with the design" of L-15 is a production documentation, which is openly stated in Russian Wiki.



Yes, because Wikipedia is the cornerstone of reliability when it comes to flight.


----------



## BoQ77

I agree with Victor:
It doesn't need 6 years ( negotiating ) to conclude "a help". It's all about China interest.
Facts:
1. Russia is the onlychoice of China for advance weapons. China is still under embargo of Western and America because of Tiananmen massacre 1989
2. China denied to carry out the hundreds billion deal of oil because the agreed price over 100 dollars but after that world price down to 40-50 dollars
3. Su-35 is clearly a big player compare to any Chinese made

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## j20blackdragon

Su-35 articles involving China are a dime a dozen. Every year China is supposed to buy the Su-35 for the last 6 years and it never happens. I'll believe the Su-35 deal is real when we get pictures/videos of the Su-35 in China in PLAAF colors.

Here's a 2013 BBC article about China purchasing 24 Su-35s and 4 Lada-class submarines. Supposedly the deal was signed. Did it happen?

China 'buys fighter jets and submarines from Russia' - BBC News

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

j20blackdragon said:


> Su-35 articles involving China are a dime a dozen. Every year China is supposed to buy the Su-35 for the last 6 years and it never happens. I'll believe the Su-35 deal is real when we get pictures/videos of the Su-35 in China in ]



The rumor based on the ongoing negotiation and it seems to be more realistic year after year. 
to admit, based on Chinese netizen there is always reason for the deal, engine, weapon, .. For example. 
For many others, China J11D, J16 is always more advance and stronger than Su35 while they never known what Su 35 or J16, J11D.. Could perform.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## victor07

j20blackdragon said:


> Su-35 articles involving China are a dime a dozen. Every year China is supposed to buy the Su-35 for the last 6 years and it never happens. I'll believe the Su-35 deal is real when we get pictures/videos of the Su-35 in China in PLAAF colors.
> 
> Here's a 2013 BBC article about China purchasing 24 Su-35s and 4 Lada-class submarines. Supposedly the deal was signed. Did it happen?
> 
> China 'buys fighter jets and submarines from Russia' - BBC News
> View attachment 274075


Now these rumors are supported directly by Chinese media. Китайский эксперт: Су-35 – это лишь переходная модель самолета


----------



## Deino

victor07 said:


> Now these rumors are supported directly by Chinese media. Китайский эксперт: Су-35 – это лишь переходная модель самолета




Strange, only the Russian translated version shows this ... I cannot find the English one !? And even more I do not know, how reliable this site is to be taken as an official confirmation or if that page only summarises international news reports.

Anyway in regard to the ongoing discussion if true, if useful, if necesary or not, I beg to take the reports this time a bit "more" seriously than the other ones before, since this time - YES, so far only Russian reports - admit that the deal was signed, which is a bit more than "still under discussion". Agreed, it is not confirmed like we would like to, but I really can't think that the Russians will embarrass themselves simply by telling us in a few weeks: "upps, sorry guys ... that all was a false report !"

In general I agree with You that this deal is only fully confirmed if confirmed by a Chinese authoritive source ... but that could also be very late or even never since there's no need for the PLAAF to do so. Was the Il-78 purchase ever officially confirmed for example ??

Even more I beg You all to take into consideration that there might be reasons behind - if true - beyond our own thinkings. May these be simply political support, technology cooperation or transfer, ... I have the feeling that for some here this deal simply could not be since it isn't allowed to be. The J-11D, J-16 and other techological progess aside ... 

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## victor07

SinoSoldier said:


> What are you even talking about? Russia received $11.6 billion in loans from the Chinese for their non-financial sector alone, which is significant considering that almost every major Western body has emplaced economic sanctions on Russia and their foreign investments are falling faster than a rock in water. China also signed a $25 billion


Which exactly loans you are talking about? Loans for private companies from private banks? If yes, that help is just mutually beneficial use of the situation. Details, please.



SinoSoldier said:


> You are free to believe what you wish. It has no bearing on the reality that the Chinese have simultaneously developed multiple fighter families with top-of-the-line subsystems and the potential to take a portion of the export pie that had been previously dominated by the US and Russia.


Yes China has developed, but initially by using technologies from Russia and Israel for example like J-10, and we know it exactly in Russia. (J-10 (Цзянь-10) - маневренность, надежность, интегрированная система бортового оборудования (самолет создан с использованием израильских и российских технологий)) Истребители Су-35 дополнят возможности ВМС Китая - ВПК.name
As for current stage of Chinese technology you may say whatever you want, all this is useless since we do not see these aircrafts at the leading international exhibitions.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

victor07 said:


> Which exactly loans you are talking about? Loans for private companies from private banks? If yes, that help is just mutually beneficial use of the situation. Details, please.



The loans are mostly between state-owned Chinese banks and Russian companies. The deal is mutually beneficial provided that Russia has a decent credit standing, which it does not.



victor07 said:


> Yes China has developed, but initially by using technologies from Russia and Israel for example like J-10, and we know it exactly in Russia. (J-10 (Цзянь-10) - маневренность, надежность, интегрированная система бортового оборудования (самолет создан с использованием израильских и российских технологий)) Истребители Су-35 дополнят возможности ВМС Китая - ВПК.name



Sorry, but to this day there is no conclusive evidence that the Chinese developed the J-10 with the assistance of the Israelis. Granted, it's certainly possibe (although unconfirmed) that Russian companies helped out during the developmental process, but I very much doubt that any "technologies" were transferred. As far as the public knows, the J-10A uses essentially all-Chinese subsystems with the exception of its engine.



victor07 said:


> As for current stage of Chinese technology you may say whatever you want, all this is useless since we do not see these aircrafts at the leading international exhibitions.



That is because the Chinese don't intend to export their J-11X or J-20 fighter aircraft. I don't see how that is relevant in our discussion of the Su-35's usefulness.


----------



## victor07

Deino said:


> Strange, only the Russian translated version shows this ... I cannot find the English one !? And even more I do not know, how reliable this site is to be taken as an official confirmation or if that page only summarises international news reports.
> 
> Anyway in regard to the ongoing discussion if true, if useful, if necesary or not, I beg to take the reports this time a bit "more" seriously than the other ones before, since this time - YES, so far only Russian reports - admit that the deal was signed, which is a bit more than "still under discussion". Agreed, it is not confirmed like we would like to, but I really can't think that the Russians will embarrass themselves simply by telling us in a few weeks: "upps, sorry guys ... that all was a false report !"
> 
> In general I agree with You that this deal is only fully confirmed if confirmed by a Chinese authoritive source ... but that could also be very late or even never since there's no need for the PLAAF to do so. Was the Il-78 purchase ever officially confirmed for example ??
> 
> Even more I beg You all to take into consideration that there might be reasons behind - if true - beyond our own thinkings. May these be simply political support, technology cooperation or transfer, ... I have the feeling that for some here this deal simply could not be since it isn't allowed to be. The J-11D, J-16 and other techological progess aside ...
> 
> Deino



Carrier Liaoning was also bought in Ukraine in order to be "converted to casino"


----------



## Deino

Via "A.Man" (SDF) an official response to the Su-35 and S-400 purchase ... however I beg for a translation.



国防部：苏-35飞机合作项目取得阶段性成果

2015-11-26 15:43:14 

记者：俄罗斯媒体报道，俄官方部门表示中国和俄罗斯签署了购买24架苏-35飞机的合同，金额高达20亿美元。请予以证实。

吴谦：苏-35飞机合作项目，是中俄双方均有意愿积极开展的一个合作领域，通过双方的共同努力，已经取得阶段性成果。双方将继续按照平等互利的原则，发展军技领域的合作。

国防部：苏-35飞机合作项目取得阶段性成果 ——国防部网站


国防部回应购俄S400导弹：合作正按计划开展

2015-11-26 15:50:04 

记者：俄塔社报道，俄罗斯计划在12-18个月内向中国提供首批S-400防空导弹系统。报道还说，俄罗斯官方已经于2015年4月宣布与中国签署了出售S-400的合同，合同金额大概是30亿美元。美国《防务周刊》认为，这种武器系统将显著地扩大中国的防空空间。请问对此作何评价？

吴谦：防空领域是中俄军技合作的重要方向，有关合作正在按计划顺利开展。

国防部：中俄防空领域合作顺利开展 ——国防部网站


Deino


----------



## Brainsucker

Deino said:


> Via "A.Man" (SDF) an official response to the Su-35 and S-400 purchase ... however I beg for a translation.
> 
> 
> 
> 国防部：苏-35飞机合作项目取得阶段性成果
> 
> 2015-11-26 15:43:14
> 
> 记者：俄罗斯媒体报道，俄官方部门表示中国和俄罗斯签署了购买24架苏-35飞机的合同，金额高达20亿美元。请予以证实。
> 
> 吴谦：苏-35飞机合作项目，是中俄双方均有意愿积极开展的一个合作领域，通过双方的共同努力，已经取得阶段性成果。双方将继续按照平等互利的原则，发展军技领域的合作。
> 
> 国防部：苏-35飞机合作项目取得阶段性成果
> ——国防部网站
> 
> 
> 国防部回应购俄S400导弹：合作正按计划开展
> 
> 2015-11-26 15:50:04
> 
> 记者：俄塔社报道，俄罗斯计划在12-18个月内向中国提供首批S-400防空导弹系统。报道还说，俄罗斯官方已经于2015年4月宣布与中国签署了出售S-400的合同，合同金额大概是30亿美元。美国《防务周刊》认为，这种武器系统将显著地扩大中国的防空空间。请问对此作何评价？
> 
> 吴谦：防空领域是中俄军技合作的重要方向，有关合作正在按计划顺利开展。
> 
> 国防部：中俄防空领域合作顺利开展
> ——国防部网站
> 
> 
> Deino



DOD: Su-35 aircraft cooperation projects to achieve substantive results2015-11-26 15:43:14

Reporter: Russian media reports, the Russian official department, said China and Russia signed a purchase 24 Su-35 aircraft of the contract, the amount of up to $ 2 billion. Please be confirmed.

Wu Qian: Su-35 aircraft cooperation project between China and Russia is a cooperation in the field of both parties to actively carry out the wishes, through joint efforts, China has achieved initial results. The two sides will continue to follow the principle of equality and mutual benefit, the development of cooperation in the field of military technology.

DOD: Su-35 aircraft cooperation projects to achieve substantive results- Ministry of Defence website

Via goggle translate.

I don't know what it means

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Even not a clear "YES, I confirm" it is at least also not a "No, this is a false report!" ....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## onebyone

*Q: The report from Tass said Russia planned to provide the first batch of S-400 air defense missile systems to China within 12 to 18 months, and the Russian government announced in April this year that it had signed a 3-billion-US-dollar contract with China on the S-400 air defense missile system.*

*According to the US Defense News, such air defense missile systems will greatly improve the air defense capability of the Chinese military. Could you please give your comments on this?*

A: Air defense cooperation is an important part of China-Russia military technology cooperation. Relevant cooperation is going on according to plan.


*Q: On November 24th this month, the Su-24 fighter jet of Russia was shot down by Turkey’s military. Could you please comment on this?*

A: The spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Ministry has already stated China’s position on this issue, and we hope relevant parties can strengthen communication on the issue of counter-terrorism so as to make a coordinated campaign.

Defense Ministry's regular press conference on Nov. 26

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

Both deal of Su-35 and S-400 will go ahead. But it will not be for China.


----------



## The Eagle

Beast said:


> Both deal of Su-35 and S-400 will go ahead. But it will not be for China.


Please shed some light so would b helpful. Thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ArsalanKhan21

The Eagle said:


> Beast said:
> 
> 
> 
> Both deal of Su-35 and S-400 will go ahead. But it will not be for China.
> 
> 
> 
> Please shed some light so would b helpful. Thanks.
Click to expand...


Do enlighten us.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 大汉奸柳传志

Brainsucker said:


> Wu Qian: Su-35 aircraft cooperation project between China and Russia is a cooperation in the field of both parties to actively carry out the wishes, through joint efforts, China has achieved initial results. The two sides will continue to follow the principle of equality and mutual benefit, the development of cooperation in the field of military technology.



As subtle as it sounds, it means the SU-35 program is now a JV between China and Russia. Soon we will be able to see a new upgraded version of SU-35 with China providing many sub-systems.


----------



## Brainsucker

utp45 said:


> As subtle as it sounds, it means the F-35 program is now a JV between China and Russia. Soon we will be able to see a new upgraded version of F-35 with China providing many sub-systems.



Hey, China and Russia don't have F-35  It is SU-35. But don't worry, I too sometime said that SU-35 is F-35


----------



## 大汉奸柳传志

Brainsucker said:


> Hey, China and Russia don't have F-35  It is SU-35. But don't worry, I too sometime said that SU-35 is F-35


Sorry, was typing that when chatting with someone.


----------



## Deino

Beast said:


> Both deal of Su-35 and S-400 will go ahead. But it will not be for China.




Indeed that's something You need to explain ??

Deino


----------



## Brainsucker

Deino said:


> Indeed that's something You need to explain ??
> 
> Deino



He said that those weapons (S-400 and Su-35) will be given to Pakistan. But I doubt it.


----------



## Deino

Brainsucker said:


> He said that those weapons (S-400 and Su-35) will be given to Pakistan. But I doubt it.




Forget that ... NEVER !

If Pakistan would acquire Russian stuff it would surely not be done via China. There's simply no reason.


----------



## Blue Marlin

Deino said:


> Forget that ... NEVER !
> 
> If Pakistan would acquire Russian stuff it would surely not be done via China. There's simply no reason.


where did this rumor even come form?

Breaking News the US sells F22 raptors to Israel!


----------



## Deino

Not from me ... Beast made a quite cryptic statement that both systems will never end in China, but he did not explain what he meant !


----------



## Blue Marlin

Deino said:


> Not from me ... Beast made a quite cryptic statement that both systems will never end in China, but he did not explain what he meant !


let me guess


----------



## Brainsucker

Blue Marlin said:


> let me guess



Maybe Beast believes in something, but we shouldn't mock him by branded him with "Keyboard Warrior". He can be wrong, but we also can be wrong with something.


----------



## Blue Marlin

Brainsucker said:


> Maybe Beast believes in something, but we shouldn't mock him by branded him with "Keyboard Warrior". He can be wrong, but we also can be wrong with something.


it is wrong to call out some one hence why i did not mention someone. so id did not 'mock' or 'brand' anyone. some of the posts made by some chinese users are very one sided. the su-35 is not going to be in the pakistan air force. period.


----------



## General Observer

Blue Marlin said:


> it is wrong to call out some one hence why i did not mention someone. so id did not 'mock' or 'brand' anyone. some of the posts made by some chinese users are very one sided. the su-35 is not going to be in the pakistan air force. period.



Looks like a certain someone is too self-loathing, claiming a certain deal, pertaining to some certain nations, unable to exist when physical evidence of such planes have yet to emerge anywhere.

Then again, perhaps it is of the British habit to consistently overestimate his/her own ability, or judgement.

Alas, I respond with this, for this certain someone's (no name mentioned) viewing pleasure, to maintain said person's level of narcissism when he/she looks at his/her reflection in the mirror each morning.


----------



## Blue Marlin

General Observer said:


> Looks like a certain someone is too self-loathing, claiming a certain deal, pertaining to some certain nations, unable to exist when physical evidence of such planes have yet to emerge anywhere.
> 
> Then again, perhaps it is of the British habit to consistently overestimate his/her own ability, or judgement.
> 
> Alas, I respond with this, for this certain someone's (no name mentioned) viewing pleasure, to maintain said person's level of narcissism when he/she looks at his/her reflection in the mirror each morning.


cutting put the old english out, your saying im not who i say i am. dont people from new-zealand have better things to do, like design your new flag or somthing? what are the runner up by the way?


----------



## General Observer

Blue Marlin said:


> cutting put the old english out, your saying im not who i say i am. dont people from new-zealand have better things to do, like design your new flag or somthing? what are the runner up by the way?



On point, people in NZ DON'T have better things to do, which is why they're ruining a perfectly fine flag that's flew for over a century. As much as I support John Key and National, I really don't understand why they've become bored enough as to even think about revisiting this old flag issue again; this is why I jumped ship, and I'm currently in the States, hence I have no idea who the runner up's are.


----------



## BoQ77

China confirms deal with Russia on Su-35 fighter jets - Xinhua | English.news.cn

China confirms deal with Russia on Su-35 fighter jets
English.news.cn | 2015-11-26 19:54:45 | Editor: huaxia






A Russian SU-35 is displayed during the MAKS-2013 international aviation and space show in the city of Zhukovsky near Moscow, Russia, Aug. 27, 2013. (Xinhua file photo/Jia Yuchen)

BEIJING, Nov. 26 (Xinhua) -- China confirmed a deal to buy Su-35 fighter jets from Russia on Thursday.

"The Su-35 fighter jet project is one of the areas in which China and Russia are willing to cooperate," said Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman Wu Qian in response to a question about the 2-billion-dollar deal.

The two countries will continue to enhance cooperation in military technology based on equality and mutual benefit, Wu said at a monthly press briefing.

While commenting on another question about Russia's plan to provide the first round of S-400 modern anti-aircraft missile systems to China within the next 12 to 18 months, Wu said cooperation is under way according to plans.

Air defense is an important part of China-Russia military technology cooperation, the spokesman added.



Beast said:


> What is Rostec? Mining, investment and commercial manufacturing.... Rosobornexport deals only in Russian military. If Rosoboronexport has no news that means nothing happen for this 24 Su-35.



Rostec :: News :: UIMC is outfitting the Su-35 fighters for China with modern communication capabilities
23 Nov 2015
*UIMC is outfitting the Su-35 fighters for China with modern communication capabilities*
*The systems enable secure communications and are resistant to interference*





_United Instrument Manufacturing Corporation (UIMC) will deliver communication systems to China for its military airfields and will also equip the super-maneuverable Su-35 fighters to be delivered to the Chinese Air Force with modern communication equipment. The systems enable secure communications resistant to interference and are integrated into a single network for tactical aviation._

“Russia and China signed a major contract for the purchase of the Su-35 multipurpose fighters. The S-108 updated communications system, which is part of the fighter’s equipment, facilitates the inclusion of these aircraft in automated military control systems,” said Sergey Skokov, Deputy CEO of UIMC. “While working in anti-interference mode, the system facilitates information exchange between all communication systems used by the Air Force.”

He said that, compared to the previous generation of communications equipment, the new system has a greater radio bandwidth, an increased number of concurrent data links, a reduced delivery time, and greater accuracy in receiving messages while fending off electronic countermeasures.

In addition, the S-108 system can relay communication signals between ground control and aircraft to perform combat missions.

Russian equipment is required to control aircraft produced by Sukhoi. Therefore, UIMC is providing Chinese military airfields with the NKVS-27 ground-based system, which is designed for communication with frontline aircraft and other types of aircraft.

"The system organizes networks and communication channels, primarily for tactical aircraft such as the Su-27SKM, Su-30MK2, Su-35, and other aircraft,” said Sergey Skokov. “It has a functional command post and performs automated control commands, transmits commands to higher levels of management, and monitors and records processes carried out in performing flight missions. The NKVS-27 enables multi-channel voice and data communication with the aircraft across all modes of their combat use and at a distance of up to 1,500 km. "

The export of this Polyot RPC product is being carried out as part of Rosoboronexport’s comprehensive supply of aviation equipment to China.

In November, Rostec Corporation CEO Sergey Chemezov announced that Russia and China had signed a major contract for the purchase of the Su-35 multipurpose fighters. In this regard, the Chinese military has become the first foreign customer to purchase these airplanes; previously only the Russian Air Force operated them.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Zarvan

Sukhoi Su-35 at China Airshow 2014

China’s recent purchase of 24 Su-35 fighter jets will be used to patrol South China Sea to counter US.

China entered into a contract to purchase the fighter jets for US $2 billion in November. A report from mil.Huanqiu.com news website reported Sunday that China finally agreed to the purchase due to the tension in South China Sea between China and the US.

According to Chinadaily, a news website, China will not be able to deploy its J-20 and J-31 stealth fighters will take few more years and they would not be available to deal with US threat.

The long range of the Su-35 and its superiority to US and Japanese fighter jets will enable China to patrol the South China Sea for 24 hours every day for the time being until it is able to deploy its own stealth fighters, the report said.

The Su-35’s ability to take off from a relatively short runway will enable it to use the runways China will build on its artificial islands.

Moreover, the high price of the purchase indicates the transfer of some technology to China, especially that in the Su-35’s Irbis-E radar that can detect a stealth fighter jet like the F-35 90 km away, and the Russian 117S engine.

Chinese Su-35 To Counter US Military Movement In South China Sea

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BoQ77

Zarvan said:


> Sukhoi Su-35 at China Airshow 2014
> 
> China’s recent purchase of 24 Su-35 fighter jets will be used to patrol South China Sea to counter US.
> 
> China entered into a contract to purchase the fighter jets for US $2 billion in November. A report from mil.Huanqiu.com news website reported Sunday that China finally agreed to the purchase due to the tension in South China Sea between China and the US.
> 
> According to Chinadaily, a news website, China will not be able to deploy its J-20 and J-31 stealth fighters will take few more years and they would not be available to deal with US threat.
> 
> The long range of the Su-35 and its superiority to US and Japanese fighter jets will enable China to patrol the South China Sea for 24 hours every day for the time being until it is able to deploy its own stealth fighters, the report said.
> 
> The Su-35’s ability to take off from a relatively short runway will enable it to use the runways China will build on its artificial islands.
> 
> Moreover, the high price of the purchase indicates the transfer of some technology to China, especially that in the Su-35’s Irbis-E radar that can detect a stealth fighter jet like the F-35 90 km away, and the Russian 117S engine.
> 
> Chinese Su-35 To Counter US Military Movement In South China Sea



Russia said that there's no ToT.
I doubt about ToT of 117S engine as well


----------



## rashid.sarwar

So russia still ahead of china ... what are the main components that made the chinese buy the Su 35 when they have J16 .....

Can any one give Su 35 vs J16/J15 ........


----------



## dadeechi

rashid.sarwar said:


> *So russia still ahead of china* ... ....



Are you really serious?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Russia will begin delivery of Su-35 fighter jets to China in the 4th quarter of 2016, a military-diplomatic official told TASS on Friday.

"Supplies of fighter jets will start in the 4th quarter of this year. For now, everything goes according to plan," the official was quoted as saying.

It was reported earlier that Russia and China signed a contract on delivering 24 Su-35 fighter jets worth at least $2 billion to Beijing. The contract is expected to be fulfilled in three years, report says.

United Instrument Manufacturing Corporation has also begun production of modernized communication systems S-108 for Su-35 jets, the report added.

China To Start Receiving Su-35 Jets From 2016-End

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Akasa

The integration of Chinese avionics and subsystems will take far longer, however.


----------



## cloud4000

Still wondering if these Su-35s with Chinese systems will end up in Pakistan.


----------



## Akasa

There is a running rumor that the rationale behind the Su-35 purchase was that problems were found with the old Su-27SK, forcing them to be retired early, and thus creating a numbers gap that could not be sufficiently closed with the current production rate of the J-16, J-11D, or J-15.


----------



## Beast

cloud4000 said:


> Still wondering if these Su-35s with Chinese systems will end up in Pakistan.


Yes, it will. It will position under Gawadar port defence. It might be flying PLAAF ensign but operate by Pakistan personnel.



SinoSoldier said:


> There is a running rumor that the rationale behind the Su-35 purchase was that problems were found with the old Su-27SK, forcing them to be retired early, and thus creating a numbers gap that could not be sufficiently closed with the current production rate of the J-16, J-11D, or J-15.


That is nonsense. These SU-35 is not for PLAAF service. SU-27SK phased out is well taken care by J-11B and J-11BS.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Akasa

Beast said:


> Yes, it will. It will position under Gawadar port defence. It might be flying PLAAF ensign but operate by Pakistan personnel.
> 
> 
> That is nonsense. These SU-35 is not for PLAAF service. SU-27SK phased out is well taken care by J-11B and J-11BS.



Whether the J-16/11D production rate can keep up with demand, especially with the quicker-than-expected retirement of old Flankers, is still in question.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Viper0011.

cloud4000 said:


> Still wondering if these Su-35s with Chinese systems will end up in Pakistan.



On rotational basis when the Chinese start to keep a Naval flotilla around this region. You guys will be giving room to the USN so the Chinese will be kind of forced to . Which is good, time to get away from the SCS has come for China


----------



## Tipu7

Beast said:


> It will position under Gawadar port defence. It might be flying PLAAF ensign but operate by Pakistan personnel.


You are still holding this claim of yours???
Is there any details of Sub Systems of China which will be integrated in Su35..........?


----------



## Akasa

Tipu7 said:


> You are still holding this claim of yours???
> Is there any details of Sub Systems of China which will be integrated in Su35..........?



Most likely avionics, datalinks.


----------



## Beast

Tipu7 said:


> You are still holding this claim of yours???
> Is there any details of Sub Systems of China which will be integrated in Su35..........?


Please understand, there will not be official news or even info for such undertable deal. Thinking you could get an official link or source for such info is like asking Somalia to land a man on moon.

Its all thru insider info and link from forum. From what I understand , intergrating Chinese subsystem into Su-35 is on the table but whether it will go ahead, I am not sure.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pomegranate

Beast said:


> Yes, it will. It will position under Gawadar port defence. It might be flying PLAAF ensign but operate by Pakistan personnel.


----------



## Max Pain

last time I read such a news I got surprised cuz for a country like China, just 24 jets dont make any sense while Pakistan's Naval Arm was looking for exactly 2 squadrons or in other words 24 jets,
I wonder where these jets will eventually end up.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

Pomegranate said:


>


You can laugh whatever you want. Come back here in another 2 years time in this thread and you can stop laughing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tipu7

only thing that favors your claim is ''24'' Su35. As if China ever needed them then it must have followed atleast 72 of them.
All rest if True will remain classified. Su35 even if Stationed at Gwadar then we might consider authenticity of your claim....... untill then all such stuff is just a dream like analysis or a blind shot........... lets wait for better 


Beast said:


> You can laugh whatever you want. Come back here in another 2 years time in this thread and you can stop laughing

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Manidabest

Beast said:


> Yes, it will. It will position under Gawadar port defence. It might be flying PLAAF ensign but operate by Pakistan personnel.



i hope we get them too or J11D from Chinese it will give a significant boost to our air defenses but numbers too matter....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

@ Beast at his best ! ... Sorry my friend, but if You want to be taken seriously and not stand as an ignorant Fan-boy only, You should change Your way of thinking ... and posting. That's simply the JOKE of the day, maybe even month after all Your other funny-claims ...




Beast said:


> Yes, it will. It will position under Gawadar port defence. It might be flying PLAAF ensign but operate by Pakistan personnel.
> 
> That is nonsense. These SU-35 is not for PLAAF service. SU-27SK phased out is well taken care by J-11B and J-11BS.




There is simply *NO *way - both politically and in terms of a military sense - that they will be for the PAF. If Russia wants to deliver them to Pakistan it could easily do it right away and not via a secret, mysterious and surely forbidden break of the contract via PLAAF-aquired aircraft. Not even in PLAAF-colours but based in Pakistan.


CHina would never do such a move simply in order not to destroy all Sino-Russian relations ... By the way, either proof Your claims or forget it !





Beast said:


> Please understand, there will not be official news or even info for such undertable deal. Thinking you could get an official link or source for such info is like asking Somalia to land a man on moon.
> 
> 
> Its all thru insider info and link from forum. From what I understand , intergrating Chinese subsystem into Su-35 is on the table but whether it will go ahead, I am not sure.





You are funny ! You always simply take the one argument that fits Your opinion best:


- several J-10B with yellow serials = Beast: "they are not operational, since the PLAAF did not report so and even more they did not take part on the golden Hemet exercise !" ... "They will be stored until the WS-10 is ready!" ... even if reports are known about 3 fully equipped regiments !?

- Y-20 no. 06 spotted = Beast: "they are already operational and will be used in the this year's Sino-Russian exercise !" ... with just 6 build !?

- J-20 engines = Beast: "these are WS-10G or even WS-15 !" ... with no reports on even a flight test in another type since years !?

- Z-10 engines = Beast: "these are new much more powerful engines in each and every new Z-10" ... despite the fact, that the WZ-16 is simply not ready !?


Again, in case of the Su-35 it is clear that the PLAF will never report such things, but You trust a mysterious rumor from an internet forum ?!, and in case of the J-10B You demand an official report as a source ?!


That simply does not fit ...


Anyway, I'm sure I immediately get my bashing again as a stupid foreigner, who has ZERO understanding in the Chinese capabilities nor their understandings ... and You are correct !


Yes for sure ..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Shotgunner51

@Deino

Apparently Flight Test and Training Centre (FTTC) is using Su-30MKK in one of the "adversary" regiments. Would this small batch (two dozens only) of Su-35 be used partially or entirely by HTTC?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

Deino said:


> @ Beast at his best ! ... Sorry my friend, but if You want to be taken seriously and not stand as an ignorant Fan-boy only, You should change Your way of thinking ... and posting. That's simply the JOKE of the day, maybe even month after all Your other funny-claims ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is simply *NO *way - both politically and in terms of a military sense - that they will be for the PAF. If Russia wants to deliver them to Pakistan it could easily do it right away and not via a secret, mysterious and surely forbidden break of the contract via PLAAF-aquired aircraft. Not even in PLAAF-colours but based in Pakistan.
> 
> 
> CHina would never do such a move simply in order not to destroy all Sino-Russian relations ... By the way, either proof Your claims or forget it !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are funny ! You always simply take the one argument that fits Your opinion best:
> 
> 
> - several J-10B with yellow serials = Beast: "they are not operational, since the PLAAF did not report so and even more they did not take part on the golden Hemet exercise !" ... "They will be stored until the WS-10 is ready!" ... even if reports are known about 3 fully equipped regiments !?
> 
> - Y-20 no. 06 spotted = Beast: "they are already operational and will be used in the this year's Sino-Russian exercise !" ... with just 6 build !?
> 
> - J-20 engines = Beast: "these are WS-10G or even WS-15 !" ... with no reports on even a flight test in another type since years !?
> 
> - Z-10 engines = Beast: "these are new much more powerful engines in each and every new Z-10" ... despite the fact, that the WZ-16 is simply not ready !?
> 
> 
> Again, in case of the Su-35 it is clear that the PLAF will never report such things, but You trust a mysterious rumor from an internet forum ?!, and in case of the J-10B You demand an official report as a source ?!
> 
> 
> That simply does not fit ...
> 
> 
> Anyway, I'm sure I immediately get my bashing again as a stupid foreigner, who has ZERO understanding in the Chinese capabilities nor their understandings ... and You are correct !
> 
> 
> Yes for sure ..



Deino, you are a very tactical guy but you lack the political wisdom for discussion.

Su-35 for PAF thru China is a deal with blessing from Sino-Russia. China has verbal agree not to sell any of Russia lineage Su-27 aircraft like J-11B or J-16.

Russia still technically do not want to anger India with a major weapon sales to Pakistan. Transport helicopter Mi-17,obsolete attack gunship like Mi-35 and small weapons are technically not consider a major weapon to PA. But a most advance fighter in Russia service like Su-35 sold to Pakistan directly will cause a stir between India and Russia.

Russia needs hardcash and want China act as middleman for this Su-35 deal for PAF. Same as how RD-93 engine evolved. End of the day, Russia will shoved all problem to China which India cant do anything to her.


----------



## Deino

To admit even I for myself was long more than sceptical in regard to this deal, it is now a fact and the PLAAF will surely have its reasons even if we - or not all of us - undestand or like this.

Anyway, You are correct, the FTTC uses the MKK within the 172. Brigade as a "Blue Force" regiment. IMO this unit is the most likely unit to receive them in order to explore its capabilities and develop tactics for the own use of TVC.

Deino



Beast said:


> Deino, you are a very tactical guy but you lack the political wisdom for discussion.
> 
> Su-35 for PAF thru China is a deal with blessing from Sino-Russia. China has verbal agree not to sell any of Russia lineage Su-27 aircraft like J-11B or J-16.
> 
> Russia still technically do not want to anger India with a major weapon sales to Pakistan. Transport helicopter Mi-17,obsolete attack gunship like Mi-35 and small weapons are technically not consider a major weapon to PA. But a most advance fighter in Russia service like Su-35 sold to Pakistan directly will cause a stir between India and Russia.
> 
> Russia needs hardcash and want China act as middleman for this Su-35 deal for PAF. Same as how RD-93 engine evolved. End of the day, Russia will shoved all problem to China which India cant do anything to her.




Simply in a short sentence: prove it or shut up !

It's indeed a common habbit from You to never give any source ... if You don't want to give or the post fits Your opinion, but You always want and demand an official source if the argument does not fit Your opinion. Otherwise You call other stupid or accuse them to lack a certain understanding ...

Sorry I'm already eager to simply give You a break in order to reconsider Your way of posting. Either You should use the same standard for both Your posts and others with or without a quote or You should admit that these things are Your ideas, that You found them on the net ... but do not tell them as a fact and bash others.

Again. If Russia needs cash and Pakistan could semm these bbirds ... why not directly from Sukhio, why such a political-sensitive plot via China. It does not makes any sense.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

Deino said:


> Again. If Russia needs cash and Pakistan could semm these bbirds ... why not directly from Sukhio, why such a political-sensitive plot via China. It does not makes any sense.
> 
> Deino



Did you even bother to read my post?

Defence minister Manohar Parrikar raises Pakistan question in Russia, shares concerns on arms sales - The Economic Times

_Defence minister Manohar Parrikar raises Pakistan question in Russia, shares concerns on arms sales
While the Indian military establishment does not consider the recent sale of four Russian Mi-35 attack choppers to Pakistan as having major security implications, it has been a landmark deal because it was the first combat platform Russia sold to the country.

Larger concerns revolve around reports that Pakistan is in talks to acquire the Su-35 fighter aircraft — a high-end combat platform that is more capable than the India's Su-30 MKI fleet, sources said. Though Moscow has denied that it is close to signing an agreement on the fighters, it is believed that a formal request of interest has been sent by Pakistan — the first step in a military purchase project with Russia._



You are navie to think Su-35 can be sold to PAF directly w/o repercussion from India.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Beast said:


> Did you even bother to read my post?
> 
> Defence minister Manohar Parrikar raises Pakistan question in Russia, shares concerns on arms sales - The Economic Times
> 
> _Defence minister Manohar Parrikar raises Pakistan question in Russia, shares concerns on arms sales
> While the Indian military establishment does not consider the recent sale of four Russian Mi-35 attack choppers to Pakistan as having major security implications, it has been a landmark deal because it was the first combat platform Russia sold to the country.
> 
> Larger concerns revolve around reports that Pakistan is in talks to acquire the Su-35 fighter aircraft — a high-end combat platform that is more capable than the India's Su-30 MKI fleet, sources said. Though Moscow has denied that it is close to signing an agreement on the fighters, it is believed that a formal request of interest has been sent by Pakistan — the first step in a military purchase project with Russia._
> 
> 
> 
> You are navie to think Su-35 can be sold to PAF directly w/o repercussion from India.




And You are naive to think the CHinese Su-35 can be delivered to or even based in Pakistan w/o repercussion from all over the world. 

But I think I simply leave it ....


----------



## Oldman1

Beast said:


> Deino, you are a very tactical guy but you lack the political wisdom for discussion.
> 
> Su-35 for PAF thru China is a deal with blessing from Sino-Russia. China has verbal agree not to sell any of Russia lineage Su-27 aircraft like J-11B or J-16.
> 
> Russia still technically do not want to anger India with a major weapon sales to Pakistan. Transport helicopter Mi-17,obsolete attack gunship like Mi-35 and small weapons are technically not consider a major weapon to PA. But a most advance fighter in Russia service like Su-35 sold to Pakistan directly will cause a stir between India and Russia.
> 
> Russia needs hardcash and want China act as middleman for this Su-35 deal for PAF. Same as how RD-93 engine evolved. End of the day, Russia will shoved all problem to China which India cant do anything to her.



The way you put out doesn't make sense whatsoever. If China wants the PAF to have them, just give them a loan for it and let Pakistan buy it without any hassle. Whether India finds out or not doesn't matter. What are they going to do against China or Russia for selling such weapons? And India can find out just watching what Russia does if the Su-35s going into Pakistan with no objections.


----------



## CHD

Beast said:


> Did you even bother to read my post?
> 
> Defence minister Manohar Parrikar raises Pakistan question in Russia, shares concerns on arms sales - The Economic Times
> 
> _Defence minister Manohar Parrikar raises Pakistan question in Russia, shares concerns on arms sales
> While the Indian military establishment does not consider the recent sale of four Russian Mi-35 attack choppers to Pakistan as having major security implications, it has been a landmark deal because it was the first combat platform Russia sold to the country.
> 
> Larger concerns revolve around reports that Pakistan is in talks to acquire the Su-35 fighter aircraft — a high-end combat platform that is more capable than the India's Su-30 MKI fleet, sources said. Though Moscow has denied that it is close to signing an agreement on the fighters, it is believed that a formal request of interest has been sent by Pakistan — the first step in a military purchase project with Russia._
> 
> 
> 
> You are navie to think Su-35 can be sold to PAF directly w/o repercussion from India.


I am with you beast, Gawadar will be first projection of chinese power overseas.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Beast

Deino said:


> And You are naive to think the CHinese Su-35 can be delivered to or even based in Pakistan w/o repercussion from all over the world.
> 
> But I think I simply leave it ....


Or over the world? Are you joking? hahaha.. You mean the whole world besides India will condemn China over this issue?



Gamer-X said:


> I am with you beast, Gawadar will be first projection of chinese power overseas.


This Deino is not an expert in Political discussion. Ignore his comment.



Oldman1 said:


> The way you put out doesn't make sense whatsoever. If China wants the PAF to have them, just give them a loan for it and let Pakistan buy it without any hassle. Whether India finds out or not doesn't matter. What are they going to do against China or Russia for selling such weapons? And India can find out just watching what Russia does if the Su-35s going into Pakistan with no objections.


You simply again failed to read my previou post. Russian now will not deal directly with PA on major weapon sales.

_Defence minister Manohar Parrikar raises Pakistan question in Russia, shares concerns on arms sales
While the Indian military establishment does not consider the recent sale of four Russian Mi-35 attack choppers to Pakistan as having major security implications, it has been a landmark deal because it was the first combat platform Russia sold to the country.

Larger concerns revolve around reports that Pakistan is in talks to acquire the Su-35 fighter aircraft — a high-end combat platform that is more capable than the India's Su-30 MKI fleet, sources said. Though Moscow has denied that it is close to signing an agreement on the fighters, it is believed that a formal request of interest has been sent by Pakistan — the first step in a military purchase project with Russia._

Source: DEFENCE MINISTER MANOHAR PARRIKAR RAISES PAKISTAN QUESTION IN RUSSIA, SHARES CONCERNS ON ARMS SALES

Remember how the sneaky Russia sell RD-93 engines to Pakistan right under India nose thru China as middleman. History will repeat itself. Russia will then claimed " You see, its all the Chinese fault. We have nothing to do with it! " India will then s*ck its thumb with such claims.


----------



## Shotgunner51

Deino said:


> To admit even I for myself was long more than sceptical in regard to this deal, it is now a fact and the PLAAF will surely have its reasons even if we - or not all of us - undestand or like this.
> 
> Anyway, You are correct, the FTTC uses the MKK within the 172. Brigade as a "Blue Force" regiment. IMO this unit is the most likely unit to receive them in order to explore its capabilities and develop tactics for the own use of TVC.
> 
> Deino




Well as civilians we all have limited info on the deal, even more limited on the intentions! My guesses are like these, for Chinese intentions are:

*FTTC* got upgraded "foreign" birds (on top of MKK).
AVIC can examine the new *engines*.

Directly helps funding Russian in their expensive military campaigns versus *common adversaries*.

Strengthen *de facto alliance* with Russia.

Indirectly helps *Pakistan* to clear Su-35 opportunities from opponent's camp. (These birds may or may not end up in Pakistani possession, I have no clue yet, let's see what @Beast has to say)
Despite the amount is small, still good value for excessive & low yield *forex reserves*.
For Russians:

Immediate *financials*, on both jets and engines.
*Marketing effect* for the bird to other buyers.
Strengthen *de facto alliance* with China

Keep engaged in AVIC *engine* progress, not being alienated from it.

Rally domestic & foreign (from India) support to focus on *PAKFA/T50*.
Just my personal guesses, nothing confirmed. Your views are welcome!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

Here's a reasonable summary I found at the CDF (by SARguy):




> I was chatting with my friend at his GSI office when the news broke (MoD confirmation of the Su-35-deal). He smiled and said there is definite smell from the Sovremenny deal over two decades ago. Time would tell what are included (or not included) in the fine prints. For the moment, I think Sukhoi badly needs the contract, the business, the marketing effect and the hard cash. Russia would gain from diplomatic and strategic fronts for having China continues to be a major customer of its military equipment. As for us, 24 frames won't do anything to alter our existing defense posture. The purchase would deepen the defense cooperation of the two giants which carries the implied reality of de facto alliance The contract would serve to enhance and reinforce the overall bilateral relationship and give addition meaning to the much advertised " Sino-Russia Comprehensive Strategic Collaborative Partnership". For mere 2 billion dollars, give or take, in exchange for win/win is good business, big BANG for the buck for both countries.




Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Pomegranate

Beast said:


> You can laugh whatever you want. Come back here in another 2 years time in this thread and you can stop laughing.


Sir i am not laughing on you but on him .... i loved Your answer ... dont get me wrong here ..........

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shotgunner51

Deino said:


> Here's a reasonable summary I found at the CDF (by SARguy):
> 
> 
> Deino




Yes that summary does sound reasonable. The 24 jets deal is only like rounding error for China's annual imports (over $1.689 trillion), a true big BANG for buck for both nations!

China 2015 Trade Surplus Reaches $594.5 Billions

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

Beast said:


> You simply again failed to read my previou post. Russian now will not deal directly with PA on major weapon sales.
> 
> _Defence minister Manohar Parrikar raises Pakistan question in Russia, shares concerns on arms sales
> While the Indian military establishment does not consider the recent sale of four Russian Mi-35 attack choppers to Pakistan as having major security implications, it has been a landmark deal because it was the first combat platform Russia sold to the country.
> 
> Larger concerns revolve around reports that Pakistan is in talks to acquire the Su-35 fighter aircraft — a high-end combat platform that is more capable than the India's Su-30 MKI fleet, sources said. Though Moscow has denied that it is close to signing an agreement on the fighters, it is believed that a formal request of interest has been sent by Pakistan — the first step in a military purchase project with Russia._
> 
> Source: DEFENCE MINISTER MANOHAR PARRIKAR RAISES PAKISTAN QUESTION IN RUSSIA, SHARES CONCERNS ON ARMS SALES
> 
> Remember how the sneaky Russia sell RD-93 engines to Pakistan right under India nose thru China as middleman. History will repeat itself. Russia will then claimed " You see, its all the Chinese fault. We have nothing to do with it! " India will then s*ck its thumb with such claims.




So you are saying Russia will never ever sell a major weapons system to Pakistan directly? Only through China?


----------



## Dungeness

Oldman1 said:


> So you are saying Russia *will never ever sell *a major weapons system to Pakistan directly? Only through China?



Apparently, that is NOT what he said. You may want to recheck your fact.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Blue Marlin

Deino said:


> To admit even I for myself was long more than sceptical in regard to this deal, it is now a fact and the PLAAF will surely have its reasons even if we - or not all of us - undestand or like this.
> 
> Anyway, You are correct, the FTTC uses the MKK within the 172. Brigade as a "Blue Force" regiment. IMO this unit is the most likely unit to receive them in order to explore its capabilities and develop tactics for the own use of TVC.
> 
> Deino
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Simply in a short sentence: prove it or shut up !
> 
> It's indeed a common habbit from You to never give any source ... if You don't want to give or the post fits Your opinion, but You always want and demand an official source if the argument does not fit Your opinion. Otherwise You call other stupid or accuse them to lack a certain understanding ...
> 
> Sorry I'm already eager to simply give You a break in order to reconsider Your way of posting. Either You should use the same standard for both Your posts and others with or without a quote or You should admit that these things are Your ideas, that You found them on the net ... but do not tell them as a fact and bash others.
> 
> Again. If Russia needs cash and Pakistan could semm these bbirds ... why not directly from Sukhio, why such a political-sensitive plot via China. It does not makes any sense.
> 
> Deino


good lord are you guys doing this again!?
WHY?
I think pakistan will introduce the j31 as its new 5th gen fighter and would serve in the naval avation branch too as it hasss good range and is capable of holding asm's . can the j31 hold asm's internally?


----------



## Beast

Blue Marlin said:


> good lord are you guys doing this again!?
> WHY?
> I think pakistan will introduce the j31 as its new 5th gen fighter and would serve in the naval avation branch too as it hasss good range and is capable of holding asm's . can the j31 hold asm's internally?


Su-35 and J-31 are different roles of aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Oldman1

Dungeness said:


> Apparently, that is NOT what he said. You may want to recheck your fact.



This is what he implies right here.

You simply again failed to read my previou post. Russian now will not deal directly with PA on major weapon sales.-Beast


----------



## 帅的一匹

Beast said:


> Deino, you are a very tactical guy but you lack the political wisdom for discussion.
> 
> Su-35 for PAF thru China is a deal with blessing from Sino-Russia. China has verbal agree not to sell any of Russia lineage Su-27 aircraft like J-11B or J-16.
> 
> Russia still technically do not want to anger India with a major weapon sales to Pakistan. Transport helicopter Mi-17,obsolete attack gunship like Mi-35 and small weapons are technically not consider a major weapon to PA. But a most advance fighter in Russia service like Su-35 sold to Pakistan directly will cause a stir between India and Russia.
> 
> Russia needs hardcash and want China act as middleman for this Su-35 deal for PAF. Same as how RD-93 engine evolved. End of the day, Russia will shoved all problem to China which India cant do anything to her.


It's not gonna be possible man.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CAPRICORN-88

Max Pain said:


> last time I read such a news I got surprised cuz for a country like China, just 24 jets dont make any sense while Pakistan's Naval Arm was looking for exactly 2 squadrons or in other words 24 jets,
> I wonder where these jets will eventually end up.



 That is a pretty good observation as well as question, I must say?

In fact China only wanted 4 units initially but Russia refuse to sell unless China ordered at least 48.

Some detractors then straightaway alleged that China only wanted such a small number of them because they wanted to reverse engineer or copy it.

If one have been following Chinese aviation news and their advancement over the last 10~20 years and apply the same logic for the question you asked, you would laugh it off as well.

China is already producing the many improved *variants of the Shenyang J11B* which are in fact a smaller and lighter version of the basic SU-27 (In fact all the SU-30, 32, 24 are variant of the basic SU-27) and IMO the latest J-11D as well as the rumored electronic version may be or should be more advanced than the RuAF SU-35. 

*EXAMPLE: The J-16 have a 12 tons payload capability whiles the SU-30MKK2 can carry max. 8 tons.*

There are at least *4 stealth aircraft programs inside China today* and the *J-20 is already started LRIP* while Russia is still struggling to complete all their testing with their T-50 FGFA.

In view of all these, then what does China needs SU-35 for?

IMHO The Chinese “Golden Helmet” as well as their ACMI program, off course as predators against their jets.

Even the US Top Guns program has secretly acquired China F-7M as well Russian fighters for the job.

SO what is so surprising if China buys them for the same purpose? How did China obtain the Harrier for example as displayed in their Air Museum?

If China really needs these SU-35 fighters so badly to defend herself as suggested then they should have signed for it 5 years ago at the T&C of the Russian and the quantity should not be less than 200. The number which China agreed on when they signed for those SU-27 which incidentally had mostly either scrapped or retired. Russian made warplanes have very limited airframe lifespan.

Here is another observation, China has never voiced or raised any complaints about Russia sales of the Kilo to Vietnam. Most military enthusiasts like us knew the answer but it was the Russian Military that confirmed it when they revealed that Chinese warships could detect Russian Sub including the Kilo submarines during their exercises in the Mediterranean Sea.

*China says its new JH-7 electronic fighter is able to shoot down stealth aircraft at medium range*
August 13, 2015

_The following is based on a translation of a report in Chinese media_:

In its report, mil.news.sina.com.cn says that the new electronic variant of the JH-7 fighter/bomber is able to shoot down stealth aircraft at medium range.

The new JH-7 uses technology similar to the US EA-18G and is able to shoot down the US F-22 stealth fighter jet.

China has developed electronic equipment similar to that used on the US EA-18G.

As JH-7 can carry a heavy load, it is precisely the right warplane to carry such equipment.

Te report says that the JH-7 has a similar combat radius and speed to the J-10 and the J-11.

Some JH-7s and J-10s or J-11s can form a comprehensive combat group with JH-7 electronic fighters providing electronic interference.

That will enable J-10s or J-11s to avoid being attacked by stealth fighters.

In addition, due to the JH-7’s large loading capacity, The JH-7 can carry, in addition to the heavy electronic equipment, some anti-radiation and medium-range air-to-air missiles to shoot down stealth fighters it has detects.

Moreover, a JH-7 electronic fighter/bomber will to some extent be stealthy.

Through various modifications, a new variant JH-7B has been developed to be stealthy.

The new JH-7B is expected to be put into series production this year.















 Will these birds be really flying in the next couple of years?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Signalian

CAPRICORN-88 said:


> *China says its new JH-7 electronic fighter is able to shoot down stealth aircraft at medium range*
> August 13, 2015
> 
> _The following is based on a translation of a report in Chinese media_:
> 
> In its report, mil.news.sina.com.cn says that the new electronic variant of the JH-7 fighter/bomber is able to shoot down stealth aircraft at medium range.
> 
> The new JH-7 uses technology similar to the US EA-18G and is able to shoot down the US F-22 stealth fighter jet.
> 
> China has developed electronic equipment similar to that used on the US EA-18G.
> 
> As JH-7 can carry a heavy load, it is precisely the right warplane to carry such equipment.
> 
> Te report says that the JH-7 has a similar combat radius and speed to the J-10 and the J-11.
> 
> Some JH-7s and J-10s or J-11s can form a comprehensive combat group with JH-7 electronic fighters providing electronic interference.
> 
> That will enable J-10s or J-11s to avoid being attacked by stealth fighters.
> 
> In addition, due to the JH-7’s large loading capacity, The JH-7 can carry, in addition to the heavy electronic equipment, some anti-radiation and medium-range air-to-air missiles to shoot down stealth fighters it has detects.
> 
> Moreover, a JH-7 electronic fighter/bomber will to some extent be stealthy.
> 
> Through various modifications, a new variant JH-7B has been developed to be stealthy.
> 
> The new JH-7B is expected to be put into series production this year.



How many Low/High band jamming pods as well as detection pods and which SEAD missile?


----------



## Akasa

Sarge said:


> How many Low/High band jamming pods as well as detection pods and which SEAD missile?



The JH-7B has not actually entered production or service yet. The SEAD/EW roles will be taken up by the *J-16D*, which has integrated jamming receiver pods similar to the AN/ALQ218 as well as a new AESA radar with integrated jamming modes. It will likely carry the *CM-102*, *LD-10*, and/or *CM-400AKG* as the bulk of its anti-radar armament.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## kungfugymnast

Oldman1 said:


> This is what he implies right here.
> 
> You simply again failed to read my previou post. Russian now will not deal directly with PA on major weapon sales.-Beast



Things are getting more commercialized that Russia could offer arms sales to just any country including countries that have close ties to America such as South Korea. India is turning towards Europeans and Americans for major arms purchase. Which means Russia will have to look for new potential customers such as PA. China doesn't control PA but more of arms supplier. Of course PA could buy Russian weapons without through China.



SinoSoldier said:


> The JH-7B has not actually entered production or service yet. The SEAD/EW roles will be taken up by the *J-16D*, which has integrated jamming receiver pods similar to the AN/ALQ218 as well as a new AESA radar with integrated jamming modes. It will likely carry the *CM-102*, *LD-10*, and/or *CM-400AKG* as the bulk of its anti-radar armament.
> 
> View attachment 288643



Glad the jh7b didn't make it. It's not a good attack aircraft and was part of China aviation tech experiments to gain experience on developing aircraft. J16d is a better fighter bomber. 

As for Russia, in future, they will cooperate more with China through indirect technology transfer such as sales pf su35. Of course, China must purchase certain numbers in order for Russian military manufacturers to earn profit enough for future R & D on new weapons.


----------



## Manidabest

China’s People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) will start receiving its first Sukhoi Su-35 Flanker-E fighters from Russia later this year.

"Supplies of fighter jets will start in the 4th quarter of this year. For now, everything goes according to plan," a Russian military-diplomatic source told theTASS late last week.
Russia signed a contract to deliver twenty-four Su-35 fighters worth more than $2 billion to China late last year.The contract will be filled within three years according to TASS’s source. Production of a modernized S-108 communications system—which was part of Beijing’s requirements—has already started.

While the addition of the Su-35 will boost Chinese capabilities while the PLAAF waits for its fifth-generation J-20 to enter service. The Su-35S is the most potent version of the Flanker built to date. The powerful twin-engine fighter is high flying, fast and carries an enormous payload. Combined with its advanced suite of avionics, that makes the Su-35 an extremely dangerous foe to any Western fighter with the sole exception of the stealthy Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor.

One Air Force official with experience on the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter has told me that the Su-35 would also pose a serious challenge for the stealthy new American jet. The F-35 was built primarily as a strike fighter and does not have the sheer speed or altitude capability of the Su-35 or F-22. “The Su's ability to go high and fast is a big concern, including for F-35,” the Air Force official explained me.

The sale of the Su-35 to China is in many ways a reflection of Russia’s weakened bargaining position. The Russians had initially insisted that the Chinese buy a minimum of forty-eight jets because of fears that Beijing simply wanted to harvest the Su-35 for its technology—particularly, the radar, electronic warfare systems and engines.

The new deal does not allow for China to license build the Su-35—but that shouldn't stop Beijing from mining the Su-35 for its technology. With access to a working aircraft, Chinese engineers will be able to learn more about the jet’s AL-41F1S engine, Ibris-E radar and electronic warfare suite. While in recent years China has have made huge technological advances of its own, Russian military technology—particularly for jet engines—is light-years ahead. Once the Su-35 is delivered, the jets are almost certainly to be reverse engineered and copied. One can initially expect advanced derivatives of the J-11 Flanker clone, but an entirely new Su-35 clone might follow as well.

“It’s a great airplane and very dangerous, especially if they make a lot of them,” one senior U.S. military official with extensive experience on fifth-generation fighters told me some time ago. “I think even an AESA [active electronically scanned array-radar equipped F-15C] Eagle and [Boeing F/A-18E/F] Super Hornet would both have their hands full.”


_Dave Majumdar is the defense editor for the _National Interest_. You can follow him on Twitter: @davemajumdar._

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue Marlin

any idea what color scheme they will be having?


----------



## Akasa

kungfugymnast said:


> Things are getting more commercialized that Russia could offer arms sales to just any country including countries that have close ties to America such as South Korea. India is turning towards Europeans and Americans for major arms purchase. Which means Russia will have to look for new potential customers such as PA. China doesn't control PA but more of arms supplier. Of course PA could buy Russian weapons without through China.
> 
> 
> 
> Glad the jh7b didn't make it. It's not a good attack aircraft and was part of China aviation tech experiments to gain experience on developing aircraft. J16d is a better fighter bomber.
> 
> As for Russia, in future, they will cooperate more with China through indirect technology transfer such as sales pf su35. Of course, China must purchase certain numbers in order for Russian military manufacturers to earn profit enough for future R & D on new weapons.



The J-16D is an electronic warfare aircraft, not a fighter-bomber. I highly doubt that the sale of Su-35 includes a technology transfer; as a matter of fact, the Chinese are said to be retrofitting them with Chinese avionics and other subsystems.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

Manidabest said:


> While in recent years China has have made huge technological advances of its own, Russian military technology—particularly for jet engines—is light-years ahead. Once the Su-35 is delivered, the jets are almost certainly to be reverse engineered and copied. One can initially expect advanced derivatives of the J-11 Flanker clone, but an entirely new Su-35 clone might follow as well.



This is highly unlikely given the development of the J-11D, which should incorporate subsystems that match, if not surpass, those found on the Su-35 in terms of capability and role. This prospect is further hampered by the fact that the Chinese are rumored to be retrofitting these Su-35s with Chinese subsystems, including avionics and weaponry.


----------



## Deino

Blue Marlin said:


> any idea what color scheme they will be having?



Maybe something like this ... ? I would love to see the PLAAF reintroduce some unit markings again....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue Marlin

Deino said:


> Maybe something like this ... ? I would love to see the PLAAF reintroduce some unit markings again....
> 
> View attachment 288773


its very plain...... maybe thats why they introduced it, so knoone knows which unit there from


----------



## kungfugymnast

SinoSoldier said:


> The J-16D is an electronic warfare aircraft, not a fighter-bomber. I highly doubt that the sale of Su-35 includes a technology transfer; as a matter of fact, the Chinese are said to be retrofitting them with Chinese avionics and other subsystems.



J16 is not China variant of su30mkk? Or j16 D variant only is AEW ECM?

The su35, China wanted its AL41 engine to assist WS15 engine for j20. For avionics, China got better tech from Western engineers.


----------



## Akasa

kungfugymnast said:


> J16 is not China variant of su30mkk? Or j16 D variant only is AEW ECM?



The J-16 family was developed from the J-11BS, not the Su-30MKK.



kungfugymnast said:


> The su35, China wanted its AL41 engine to assist WS15 engine for j20. For avionics, China got better tech from Western engineers.



There is little evidence to suggest that the Chinese are interested in the Al-41F, or that the latter was slated to be a template for the WS-15. There is also nothing concrete to suggest that the Chinese developed their avionics from Western designs.


----------



## Deino

SinoSoldier said:


> The J-16 family was developed from the J-11BS, not the Su-30MKK..



That's not entirely correct: if You look at all Su-27SK to Su-30MKK and again J-11B to J-16 details, then the J-16 is de facto a MKK-copy since it features the same heavier twin-tyre-landing gear, the same IFR-probe + off-set IRST-device, the same - and that's my most important detail ! - taller vertical tails with the same enlarged rudder (and most likely also the fuel cells) albeit without the squared fin-caps. If it would be "only" a BS-development then there would be much more similarities to the trainer version and not to the MKK.


Deino


----------



## Akasa

Deino said:


> That's not entirely correct: if You look at all Su-27SK to Su-30MKK and again J-11B to J-16 details, then the J-16 is de facto a MKK-copy since it features the same heavier twin-tyre-landing gear, the same IFR-probe + off-set IRST-device, the same - and that's my most important detail ! - taller vertical tails with the same enlarged rudder (and most likely also the fuel cells) albeit without the squared fin-caps. If it would be "only" a BS-development then there would be much more similarities to the trainer version and not to the MKK.
> 
> 
> Deino



Well, the tires are added after the main fuselage is assembled and not necessarily an inherent part of the airframe itself. As for the IRST being off-set, it could simply be a requirement of having an IFR and once again not really a hallmark of the Su-30MKK airframe design. However, take note that the J-16 and J-11BS have the same vertical stabilizer tips (the jagged one as opposed to the MKK's square one), indicating that the two were derived from the same configuration.

Moreover, it would be immensely easier for SAC to simply develop the J-16 using a present and in-production airframe than one that they probably have never taken apart.


----------



## Deino

SinoSoldier said:


> Well, the tires are added after the main fuselage is assembled and not necessarily an inherent part of the airframe itself. As for the IRST being off-set, it could simply be a requirement of having an IFR and once again not really a hallmark of the Su-30MKK airframe design. However, take note that the J-16 and J-11BS have the same vertical stabilizer tips (the jagged one as opposed to the MKK's square one), indicating that the two were derived from the same configuration.
> 
> Moreover, it would be immensely easier for SAC to simply develop the J-16 using a present and in-production airframe than one that they probably have never taken apart.




YES, but just two points ...

1. are You sure that the MKK and the standard fighters differ only in the number of tyres ? As far as I know the MKK's gear are also stronger / thicker in material (but I'm not sure to admit).

2. Agreed ... but I would go even as far that I won't exclude a secret deal or agreement behind, which "assisted" or at least "agreed" the Chinese to develop their trainer J-11BS and the J-16 ...


----------



## 艹艹艹

*Satellite news, Moscow, August 2 (Xinhua) Russian Federal Science and industry group company (rostec) general manager Mr. chemezov in talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin said that 2015 already according to Rosoboronexport's first export contract to China to sell 24 Su-35 aircraft.

The aircraft may have advanced "Irbis-E" radar control system, which can detect, track and measure the position of air, ground and water targets in any natural condition and human disturbance. Russia claims that, by virtue of a variety of advanced equipment, the majority of the performance of the Soviet Union -35 indicators have reached the requirements of the fifth generation fighter.




*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## nang2

what the neck is Soviet union 35? haha

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

long_ said:


> *Satellite news, Moscow, August 2 (Xinhua) Russian Federal Science and industry group company (rostec) general manager Mr. chemezov in talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin said that 2015 already according to Rosoboronexport's first export contract to China to sell 24 Su-35 aircraft.
> 
> The aircraft may have advanced "Irbis-E" radar control system, which can detect, track and measure the position of air, ground and water targets in any natural condition and human disturbance. Russia claims that, by virtue of a variety of advanced equipment, the majority of the performance of the Soviet Union -35 indicators have reached the requirements of the fifth generation fighter.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


this is an old news why you are repeating it?


----------



## 艹艹艹

pakistanipower said:


> this is an old news why you are repeating it?


*The news means that the plane has arrived in China.*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ultima Thule

long_ said:


> *The news means that the plane has arrived in China.*


the above your post doesn't mention it, it will only mention that you are buying SU-35 form russia nothing else


----------



## 艹艹艹

pakistanipower said:


> the above your post doesn't mention it, it will only mention that you are buying SU-35 form russia nothing else


*Delivered at the end of this year 8 Su 35
.*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

Jai.Singh said:


> My dear give me one reason why u acquiring 4++ when u surprisingly near to ur 5++.
> 
> Cant understand.... Big holes ????


Pakistan Air Force.

http://m.economictimes.com/news/def...ncerns-on-arms-sales/articleshow/49651252.cms

Your defence minister raise a concern with Russia. Russia need to use another way to sell major weapons to new customers since sale to India is falling every year. Russia sells to China and China act as gurantor and earn a small commission as middleman by re export to PAF. Same as how China re export RD-93 engines to PAF. Russia will push all blames to China and India need to eat humble pie and can't do anything to Russia or China 

Our fifth gen fighter project is going smoothly. We don't need Su-35. If we need, we will be buying at least a few dozen and not 24 which proves too little.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

Stop ... Right that Moment and no additional off-Topic or rants. Otherwisr i will ban you.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GuardianRED

Deino said:


> Stop ... Right that Moment and no additional off-Topic or rants. Otherwisr i will ban you.



Acknowledge .. sorry about that , got carried away


----------



## eldamar

long_ said:


> *The news means that the plane has arrived in China.*



From where did it mention that the planes *have already been delivered*? all Chinese new outlets only quoted the same exact *Russian source* ' 俄罗斯卫星”新闻网8月3日消息'(*Sputnik, 03 August)* that the contract has already been signed in 2015 and 24 planes *'have been sold'* to China.

Nothing else.

Not to mention*(by the Russian side again)*:

*The contract was signed but it has not come into effect yet, as both sides have not ratified the deal.*
_MOSCOW (Sputnik) — *Russia will not start deliveries of Su-35 fighter jets to China in 2016*, the head of Russia’s state technologies corporation Rostec said.

"*Not this year*," Sergei Chemezov said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal, responding to the question about the date of the first Su-35 delivery to China._



You posted :

Delivered at the end of this year 8 Su 35
.

at *10.21am (in the morning)*



*time to see a doctor for your nacrolepsy.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cnleio

where ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

(c) sdelanounas.ru
_In 2015, 24 Su-35 fighters were sold to China under the first export contract, the CEO of Rostec, Sergey Chemezov, stated at a meeting with the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin._

“The main business event that occurred last year in 2015 was the first export contract for Su-35 fighters signed by Rosoboronexport. We sold 24 fighters to China,” RIA News reports Sergey Chemezov’s statement. Thus, China has officially become the first foreign customer for Su-35s.

The Su-35 is a multifunctional 4++ generation fighter. The Su-35 is made based on Su-27/Su-30 fighters, and the “thirty-fifth” is a conceptually new fighter employing fifth-generation combat avionics.

KRET enterprises developed the Su-35 ” glass cockpit” indicators and a number of other avionics. In addition, the Concern’s specialists created the platformless INS capable of autonomously determining a fighter location without satellite navigation or communication with ground services.

It should also be mentioned that this latest navigation system was designed for use in the fifth-generation fighter PAK-FA. This points once again to the fact that the Su-35 comes close to the fifth-generation fighter in all of its features. It meets most of the requirements for fifth-generation aircraft’s, except for the stealth technology and the active phased antenna array (APAA).

Despite the lack of the APAA, the Su-35 radar system can detect targets at ranges of up to 400 km. These capabilities are provided by a new fighter radar control system with the phased array antenna Irbis, which is produced by the Ryazan State Instrument Enterprise, which is a part of KRET.

The important difference of the Su-35 over the Su-27 is the use of new high-power engines in the propulsion system. They were designed at NPO Saturn, a part of UEC, and are known as “117S”.

Presently, in service of the Russian VKS there are 48 Su-35 fighters. Under the current state arms program, Aerospace Forces shall receive 96 Su-35s before 2020.

Interest is being shown in the Russian fighter from abroad as well: some potential customers are Algeria, Egypt, Venezuela, and Vietnam. According to some expert opinions, the Su-35 is able to be a serious opponent to the F-15, the Eurofighter and the Rafale.

http://defence-blog.com/news/china-receives-24-su-35-multifunctional-4-generation-fighter.html

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## Zain Malik

@long_ @Beast @Two @ChinaRisin @wanglaokan @Chinese-Dragon @ChineseTiger1986 

Congratulations for acquiring new platform...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Dungeness

Zain Malik said:


> @long_ @Beast @Two @ChinaRisin @wanglaokan @Chinese-Dragon @ChineseTiger1986
> 
> Congratulations for acquiring new platform...




Not sure if it is worth congratulating.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zain Malik

Dungeness said:


> Not sure if it is worth congratulating


If this NEWS was To come from PAF sector ... I was going to celebrate in street and In my school with sweets...!!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## 帅的一匹

Zain Malik said:


> If this NEWS was To come from PAF sector ... I was going to celebrate in street and In my school with sweets...!!


Russia won't sell Su35 to PAF, otherwise India will say goodbye to Russia.



Zain Malik said:


> @long_ @Beast @Two @ChinaRisin @wanglaokan @Chinese-Dragon @ChineseTiger1986
> 
> Congratulations for acquiring new platform...


Thanks bro, 24 units of Su35 can't change anything. Yankee had begun to deploy F35A in the airbase near China.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Max

Zain Malik said:


> If this NEWS was To come from PAF sector ... I was going to celebrate in street and In my school with sweets...!!



But not in China's case.. China is producing J series and meanwhile acquiring Russian jet give impression that Chinese jets are inferior.. not a good decision by leadership, if they wanted any collaboration with Russia they should use under the table method instead of accepting in front of whole world..

but there is other logic as well which says 24 jets or few batteries of S- 400 will not mean anything for China.. China is supporting Russia with easy money..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Sorry but isn' t this simply a repost about the contract beig signed ? ... there is no news about these aircraft were actially delivered.

By the way ... Why again a new thread on this Topic if we already have one?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## nadeemkhan110

I heard in 2015 that Pakistan is buying SU-35 through 3rd party (China) so is it for Pakistan?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SBUS-CXK

Zain Malik said:


> @long_ @Beast @Two @ChinaRisin @wanglaokan @Chinese-Dragon @ChineseTiger1986
> 
> Congratulations for acquiring new platform...


This only prove that China's J-20 and J-31 recently cannot serve, no any reason to celebrate. 

The development of the Chinese more hope their military weapon, as far as possible to reduce dependence on foreign.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stephen Cohen

The delivery has not started yet


----------



## Stephen Cohen

*Sky Warriors: Russia to Deliver Su-35 Fighter Jets to China After 2016

http://sputniknews.com/military/20160311/1036111954/su-35-russia-china.html*


----------



## Djinn

There were speculations that China may be interested in AL-41F1S and for that may even buy SU-35, but so far there has been no official confirmation from the Chinese side. If AL-41FIS is indeed on cards, i wonder what sort of performance improvements it will bring to J-20 & J-31.


----------



## Deino

Djinn said:


> There were speculations that China may be interested in AL-41F1S and for that may even buy SU-35, but so far there has been no official confirmation from the Chinese side. If AL-41FIS is indeed on cards, i wonder what sort of performance improvements it will bring to J-20 & J-31.



As an interim-engine in place of the current AL-31FN series 3 it surely is a step ahead, but only for the J-20, since for the FC-31 this engine does not fit.

By the way... can we stay on Topic please???

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## monitor

The Chinese People’s Liberation Army-Air Force (PLAAF) is slated to receive the first four out of 24 Russian-made Sukhoi Su-35 multirole fighter jets, the governor of Khabarovsk Krai, a federal subject located in the Russian Far East, said in a speech during the opening of a new aircraft production plan on September 15, according to local media reports.

From 2016 to 2018 the Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aircraft Production plant will deliver 24 Su-35 combat aircraft to China, the governor said. China first showed interest in one of Russia’s most modern combat aircraft in 2008. Negotiations over the Su-35 deal began in 2011. A preliminary agreement was reached in 2012 with a final sales contract signed in November 2015.

“The Su-35 (NATO reporting name: Flanker-E) is a Fourth++ generation, twin-engine, highly maneuverable multirole fighter jet powered by two AL-117S turbofan engines. The Russian aircraft’s powerful turbofan engine is also the most likely reason why China is interested in acquiring Su-35 fighters,” Ipreviously explained.

One of the reasons for China’s interest in the Su-35 is its AL-117S turbofan engine. Russia has repeatedly refused to sell the engine as a stand-alone product, which left the PLAAF with little choice but to acquire the entire aircraft. The Chinese military aviation industry is still struggling with designing and building an engine for its new fifth-generation stealth fighter prototype, the Chengdu J-20.

“The most advanced Chinese-made military turbofan currently in use is the WS-10, which, however, also underperforms, according to some reports,” I explained elsewhere (See: “Confirmed: China Buys 24 Advanced Fighter Jets From Russia”). Both of the PLAAF’s new fifth-generation fighter jet prototypes–the Chengdu J-20 and Shenyang J-31–are equipped with older Russian-made jet engines, the former with the Saturn AL-31 the latter with the Klimov RD-93.

China’s aviation industry has been pushing hard to domestically develop and build high-performance turbofan engines. In August 2016, Beijing announced that it set up a new state-owned aircraft engine maker to accelerate the development of new jet engines. China, for example, is currently working on the WS-13 Taishan turbofan, a derivative of the Russian Klimov RD-33 turbofan.

Obtaining the Su-35 combat aircraft and its AL-117S turbofan engine would be a major boon for China’s aviation industry given that the engine could be reverse engineered. Next to the powerful engine, the Su-35, with its air refueling capability and its ability to carry external fuel tanks, will provide the PLAAF also with greater control of the skies over China and adjacent waters including the East and South China Seas.


----------



## cloud4000

Can you edit the article to include the source?

Nevertheless, I found this quote intriguing.



monitor said:


> *Obtaining the Su-35 combat aircraft and its AL-117S turbofan engine would be a major boon for China’s aviation industry given that the engine could be reverse engineered.* Next to the powerful engine, the Su-35, with its air refueling capability and its ability to carry external fuel tanks, will provide the PLAAF also with greater control of the skies over China and adjacent waters including the East and South China Seas.



So China bought the aircraft to reverse engineer the engines? Why would Russia let them do such a thing?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## randomradio

cloud4000 said:


> Can you edit the article to include the source?
> 
> Nevertheless, I found this quote intriguing.
> 
> 
> 
> So China bought the aircraft to reverse engineer the engines? Why would Russia let them do such a thing?



The Russians are making money. And the 117S is old compared to the 117, let alone the Type 30. And on top of that they will take a decade to reverse engineer it if that's what they are looking for. So it's fine.

They probably want the engines as a stop gap, possibly for their J-20 before the Chinese engine is ready.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hassan Guy

Is the Flanker-E a better plane then the F-35?


----------



## randomradio

Hassan Guy said:


> Is the Flanker-E a better plane then the F-35?



No. But it has some good advantages that makes it incomparable like larger radar, higher performance, missile load etc.

If the F-35's stealth is defeated due to advances in sensors, then obviously the Su-35 is better.


----------



## wiseone2

Hassan Guy said:


> Is the Flanker-E a better plane then the F-35?


i seriously doubt it


----------



## X-2.

monitor said:


> The Chinese People’s Liberation Army-Air Force (PLAAF) is slated to receive the first four out of 24 Russian-made Sukhoi Su-35 multirole fighter jets, the governor of Khabarovsk Krai, a federal subject located in the Russian Far East, said in a speech during the opening of a new aircraft production plan on September 15, according to local media reports.
> 
> From 2016 to 2018 the Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aircraft Production plant will deliver 24 Su-35 combat aircraft to China, the governor said. China first showed interest in one of Russia’s most modern combat aircraft in 2008. Negotiations over the Su-35 deal began in 2011. A preliminary agreement was reached in 2012 with a final sales contract signed in November 2015.
> 
> “The Su-35 (NATO reporting name: Flanker-E) is a Fourth++ generation, twin-engine, highly maneuverable multirole fighter jet powered by two AL-117S turbofan engines. The Russian aircraft’s powerful turbofan engine is also the most likely reason why China is interested in acquiring Su-35 fighters,” Ipreviously explained.
> 
> One of the reasons for China’s interest in the Su-35 is its AL-117S turbofan engine. Russia has repeatedly refused to sell the engine as a stand-alone product, which left the PLAAF with little choice but to acquire the entire aircraft. The Chinese military aviation industry is still struggling with designing and building an engine for its new fifth-generation stealth fighter prototype, the Chengdu J-20.
> 
> “The most advanced Chinese-made military turbofan currently in use is the WS-10, which, however, also underperforms, according to some reports,” I explained elsewhere (See: “Confirmed: China Buys 24 Advanced Fighter Jets From Russia”). Both of the PLAAF’s new fifth-generation fighter jet prototypes–the Chengdu J-20 and Shenyang J-31–are equipped with older Russian-made jet engines, the former with the Saturn AL-31 the latter with the Klimov RD-93.
> 
> China’s aviation industry has been pushing hard to domestically develop and build high-performance turbofan engines. In August 2016, Beijing announced that it set up a new state-owned aircraft engine maker to accelerate the development of new jet engines. China, for example, is currently working on the WS-13 Taishan turbofan, a derivative of the Russian Klimov RD-33 turbofan.
> 
> Obtaining the Su-35 combat aircraft and its AL-117S turbofan engine would be a major boon for China’s aviation industry given that the engine could be reverse engineered. Next to the powerful engine, the Su-35, with its air refueling capability and its ability to carry external fuel tanks, will provide the PLAAF also with greater control of the skies over China and adjacent waters including the East and South China Seas.


Why to struggle more 
Plaa should kidnap couple of advance engine engineers and make them develop if they don't get through officially


----------



## Thəorətic Muslim

X-2. said:


> Plaa should kidnap couple of advance engine engineers and make them develop if they don't get through officially



Yes because a couple of kidnapped aerospace engineers wouldn't raise any eyebrows...


----------



## monitor

© RIA Novosti. Artem Zhitenev
Go to the photo bank







© RIA Novosti. Artem Zhitenev
Go to the photo bank
NI talked about the advantages of the Su-35 Russian over the American F-15
*KHABAROVSK, September 15 -. RIA Novosti* Komsomolsk-on-Amur aviation plant (KnAAZ) in the Khabarovsk region before the end of the year will deliver to China four aircraft Su-35, said Thursday at the opening ceremony of the new plant factory governor of the region Vyacheslav Shport.


"From 2016 to 2018 is provided in the manufacturing and shipment KnAAZ 24 aircraft Su-35 for China in the current year it is planned to deliver four aircraft to China." - Shport said.

Earlier it was reported that a contract to supply 24 multi-role fighters Su-35 4 ++ generation was signed in 2015. Generation 4 ++ conditional and indicates that the aggregate characteristics of the Su-35 right up close to the fifth-generation fighter: with the exception of stealth technology and AFAR it meets most of the requirements in the fifth-generation aircraft.







© Flickr / Day Donaldson
An expert in the field of aircraft: F-35 can fly beautifully in a movie
According to some experts, the Russian Su-35 can be a serious adversary for the F-15, the Eurofighter and Rafale. This fighter by some characteristics bypasses NATO military aircraft of the fifth generation. In addition, experts say that the Russian aircraft is not inferior to the best western fourth-generation fighters, if not exceed them. The speed of the Su-35 and a large weapons load will allow him to fight outside the line of sight. A maneuverability and EW Su-35 will help to evade enemy missiles.


Currently in service in the Russian Air Force has 48 Su-35, but their number will more than double in the next five years. Russian fighter interested in and abroad. Algeria, Egypt, Venezuela and Vietnam are also potential customers.


----------



## fitpOsitive

I remember post 1990s era. When Russian were selling everything to everybody. Money was direly needed.


----------



## X-2.

Thəorətic Muslim said:


> Yes because a couple of kidnapped aerospace engineers wouldn't raise any eyebrows...


It's damn serious competition dear bro why should they waste time for next 5/10 years they are only lacking in engines especially... imagine 5generation engine manufacturing in China will help Chinese future generations jets as wl as our programme


----------



## ptldM3

X-2. said:


> Why to struggle more
> Plaa should kidnap couple of advance engine engineers and make them develop if they don't get through officially




 

And if they refuse then what? Shoot them? What can possibly go wrong if this actually happened and it was discovered?


----------



## enquencher

Is it true that all these planes are bein purchased by china for paf.pdf experts seem to suggest that.this will end pakistanis never ending quest for su 35.
One question y cant russia transfer it directly to pakistan if so.whom are they afraid of.
And if china have best of weapons in the world then y are they buying su 35 from russia.
@randomradio


----------



## Brainsucker

Why not? SU-35S is a good fighter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

enquencher said:


> Is it true that all these planes are bein purchased by china for paf.pdf experts seem to suggest that.this will end pakistanis never ending quest for su 35.
> One question y cant russia transfer it directly to pakistan if so.whom are they afraid of.
> And if china have best of weapons in the world then y are they buying su 35 from russia.
> @randomradio


Russian do not want to be directly accuse by Indian if the Su-35 transfer to PAF from China. There is nothing India can do to China.

Russia will then have a excuse. "It's the scheming Chinese who do that, not us!"

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## mike2000 is back

X-2. said:


> Why to struggle more
> Plaa should kidnap couple of advance engine engineers and make them develop if they don't get through officially


Lool You are funny. 
I thought Russia and China were close allies? Why will Russia refuse to sell them it's advanced engines, they should help their ally out seeing they are struggling in this field . Allies ought to be helping each other out, at least to counter the imperialist west.


----------



## X-2.

mike2000 is back said:


> Lool You are funny.
> I thought Russia and China were close allies? Why will Russia refuse to sell them it's advanced engines, they should help their ally out seeing they are struggling in this field . Allies ought to be helping each other out, at least to counter the imperialist west.


Russians are ismoney mongors too 
International relations always base on National interest 
Second sanction on Russia require business to sustain balance against USA or west


----------



## Beast

enquencher said:


> Russia doesnot want to be accused? Do u imply that russians are afraid of bein accused by india.
> If that was the case then jf 17 would be without engines.
> What i understand by the purchase is first chinise planes are not upto the mark.second these will be used for reverse engenieering.


Do you realize the RD-93 engine was sold to China and it was Chinese who then indirectly sold to PAF.



mike2000 is back said:


> Lool You are funny.
> I thought Russia and China were close allies? Why will Russia refuse to sell them it's advanced engines, they should help their ally out seeing they are struggling in this field . Allies ought to be helping each other out, at least to counter the imperialist west.


The problem is we do not even want their 117S engine. The WS-10B with 14k tons thrust debut.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Imran Khan

only 4 of them i was thinking 40 should be on order


----------



## terranMarine

China's new formed company with 95.000 employees will make great breakthroughs in engine tech. Mikey boy has no clue that his UK is being left behind by China in many areas

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## randomradio

enquencher said:


> Is it true that all these planes are bein purchased by china for paf.pdf experts seem to suggest that.this will end pakistanis never ending quest for su 35.
> One question y cant russia transfer it directly to pakistan if so.whom are they afraid of.
> And if china have best of weapons in the world then y are they buying su 35 from russia.
> @randomradio



The Chinese are buying Russian weapons for their own purposes. 

And it is not clear why the Chinese are buying Russian weapons.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## monitor

*I**n Demand: Why China Purchases Russian Su-35 Fighter Jets *





© AFP 2016/ JOHANNES EISELE Military & Intelligence 20:50 07.02.2016(updated 20:53 07.02.2016) Get short URL 44287071178 China’s purchase of 24 new Russian Su-35 aircraft is essential for Beijing. The Chinese Air Force will not only get new jets that could affect the balance of power in the Taiwan Strait, but may also allow the Chinese military to assess the progress and development of J-11. The purchase of 24 Russian Su-35 in the amount of about $2 billion is the second largest transaction between the Russian and Chinese militaries, the Carnegie Moscow Center wrote. A Su-34 multifunctional strike bomber of the Russian Aerospace Force takes off from the Hemeimeem Air Base in the Syrian province of Latakia. © Sputnik/ Dmitry Vinogradov Customers ‘Lining Up’ to Buy Russian Su-34, Su-35 Aircraft A year ago, a contract was signed for the supply of four battalions of S-400 anti-aircraft missile systems totaling around 1.9 billion dollars. The negotiations had begun in 2010-2011 and by 2014 many contentious issues had been resolved. It has been reported that the deliveries of the equipment could begin in 2016 and the transfer of the main parts of the equipment may take place in 2017-2018. Looking at the advantages of the purchase of Russian aircraft by China, it seems that the Chinese are currently looking for additional ways of developing their combat aircraft capabilities. As noted by the publication, between the two Chinese aircraft that are being developed at the moment, the J-20 and J-31, only the J-20 may be viewed as a fifth generation fighter. Multi-mission fighter SU-35 Sputnik Indonesian Defense Chief Plans April Russia Visit Eyeing Su-35 Purchase Hence, the J-31 uses stealth technology, but its main units and components are borrowed from the 4+ generation fighters such as the J-10B, J-16 and FC-1, the Carnegie Moscow Center wrote. As for J-20, which embodies the full potential of the Chinese aviation industry, the aircraft’s potential combat readiness is not very clear at the moment. This is supported by all the available capability of similar technologies available in the US and other countries. The publication taking note of the Russian Su-35, however, mentioned that the new jet is a maximum advancement of the earlier fighter jet the Su-27. Therefore, the acquisition of the Su-35 would allow the Chinese military to assess the progress and development of J-11. The acquisition may act as a guide showing the Russian approach to problem solving in stealth technology making it easier to further enhance the capabilities of the Chinese aviation. It is probable that with the supply of 24 Su-35’s more contracts for units or various components for the new Chinese fighters, as well as technology transfer and R & D for the benefit of Chinese customers, may follow. For Russia, the successful delivery of the fighter jets to China will further improve its position in foreign markets. It is expected that the next buyer of the Russian Su-35 may be Indonesia.

Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/20160207/1034376032/china-russia-fighter-jets-purchase.html



pakistanipower said:


>


Whats funny here you too have the offer .


----------



## Deino

Guys ... please stay on topic and regardless all troll-attempts by some strange members, there is really no need to bring again the Tejas or Kaveri on the agenda. It is so much far off ... and only some sort of troll-feeding, so better leave it.

Therefore .... thread cleaned !

Deino



enquencher said:


> Is it true that all these planes are bein purchased by china for paf. pdf experts seem to suggest that.this will end pakistanis never ending quest for su 35.
> One question y cant russia transfer it directly to pakistan if so.whom are they afraid of.
> And if china have best of weapons in the world then y are they buying su 35 from russia.
> @randomradio



pdf-experts ??? 
Sorry to say so, but please simply forget this stuff. These birds will end in China - even if the reasons for this might be not clear to all - and will never be delivered to Pakistan ... these guys who are suggesting this are fan-boys and no experts.

Why should China buy the latest Russian toy and re-sale it later to Pakistan? That will only damage an established and working relationship and if Pakistan wants these birds, then they can buy them on their own even if I don't know if they can afford them.

As such .... these are pure wet-dreams similar to such posts like Pakistan should get a few H-6K for free, China should gift two squadrons of J-10C to the PAF, ... Pakistan will acquire the Eurofighter soon or join development of the TFX.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Mentee

Why they don't use dual racks on their jets ? I mean the racks shall considerably increase the payload.


----------



## ZY-CN-CA

The 3/3++ fighter is not enough，we need a large number of excellent fighter, surrounding military threat too bad!


----------



## Deino

Another issue ... if these 4 aircraft are to be delivered already this year, then they must be close to being finished ... do we have any images showing them on the production line ?


----------



## Brainsucker

It just... why only 4? Didn't China order 24 of them? I doubt that "4" is the limit of Russia production capacity. That's why I say," Why only 4?" If the production rate continue like this, it will finish in 6 years.


----------



## Deino

4, because the report said 4 are to be delivered this year.


----------



## j20blackdragon

See how Russians like to 'blab' on and on about speculative arms deals whether real or fake? They've been talking about this Su-35 thing since November 2015. This is why I find it extra strange that there is no news whatsoever regarding AL-31FN engine sales between Salut and CAC. Both J-20 and J-10C production are ongoing. You can be sure that if the Russians were providing engines, they would talk nonstop about it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ultima Thule

Arjun Bajwa said:


> Russia slapped China in the face when it wanted to give J-11B to Pakistan by blocking the sale.


it is their right sir than they don't allow to sell it to Pakistan because J-11B is unlicensed copy of Su-27


----------



## Deino

@Alpha Fighter !

Stopp, immedaetly ! If You want to troll around and continue, then go and search for another forum or face the consequences.

This thread is on Su-35-sales to china and not again to bash Chinese engine reliability or anything else.
By the way get at least the facts correct: The WS-10A is a matured and reliable engine; PERIOD and regardless that Western engines have a higher service live of TBO.
These characteristics may be lower than You like but they seem high enough for the PLAAF and PLANAF since there are already several hundreds in service and since some years not a single operational J-11B and BS Flanker was powered by a Russian AL-31F anymore.

So simply shut up.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Alpha Fighter

Deino said:


> @Alpha Fighter !
> 
> Stopp, immedaetly ! If You want to troll around and continue, then go and search for another forum or face the consequences.
> 
> This thread is on Su-35-sales to china and not again to bash Chinese engine reliability or anything else.
> By the way get at least the facts correct: The WS-10A is a matured and reliable engine; PERIOD and regardless that Western engines have a higher service live of TBO.
> These characteristics may be lower than You like but they seem high enough for the PLAAF and PLANAF since there are already several hundreds in service and since some years not a single operational J-11B and BS Flanker was powered by a Russian AL-31F anymore.
> 
> So simply shut up.
> 
> Deino



@Deino, I simple said *Su-35 sales because of engines and Russian said not to sale of engines alone and forced china to buy planes and supported link with.*


If you and your Chinese friends have any other way link to prove it wrong then show or better keep quite then.

Do you have problem on troll, *then first point out to the Chinese who Started engine bla bla statement for its own engine, instead of pointing out on me.*


----------



## Mugwop

Deino said:


> @Alpha Fighter !
> 
> Stopp, immedaetly ! If You want to troll around and continue, then go and search for another forum or face the consequences.
> 
> This thread is on Su-35-sales to china and not again to bash Chinese engine reliability or anything else.
> By the way get at least the facts correct: The WS-10A is a matured and reliable engine; PERIOD and regardless that Western engines have a higher service live of TBO.
> These characteristics may be lower than You like but they seem high enough for the PLAAF and PLANAF since there are already several hundreds in service and since some years not a single operational J-11B and BS Flanker was powered by a Russian AL-31F anymore.
> 
> So simply shut up.
> 
> Deino


Those who are trying to bash chinese engine reliability should check out the flight hours by PLAAF and PLANAF before jumping to conclusions.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Beast

Alpha Fighter said:


> @Deino, I simple said *Su-35 sales because of engines and Russian said not to sale of engines alone and forced china to buy planes and supported link with.*
> 
> 
> If you and your Chinese friends have any other way link to prove it wrong then show or better keep quite then.
> 
> Do you have problem on troll, *then first point out to the Chinese who Started engine bla bla statement for its own engine, instead of pointing out on me.*


That is not what you say, you say PLAAF still needs to import Russian engine and J-11B series can't survive with Russia import. But I have prove you wrong and you are in constant denied without any concrete backing.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Alpha Fighter

Mugwop said:


> Those who are trying to bash chinese engine reliability should check out the flight hours by PLAAF and PLANAF before jumping to conclusions.


who are bashing just asked the figures of engines which might not come.


----------



## Deino

Alpha Fighter said:


> @Deino, I simple said *Su-35 sales because of engines and Russian said not to sale of engines alone and forced china to buy planes and supported link with.*
> 
> 
> If you and your Chinese friends have any other way link to prove it wrong then show or better keep quite then.
> 
> Do you have problem on troll, *then first point out to the Chinese who Started engine bla bla statement for its own engine, instead of pointing out on me.*




It's simply a matter of facts: You may be correct that the true background behind that sale is to get hands on the 117S engine, but surely not since the WS-10A is unreliable, underpowered or has a weak TBO - and that's what You claimed - but more related to TVC and the higher thrust to be used for the J-20 ... maybe.

By the way it's funny that You call out on "me and my Chinese friends", since esp. with a few here I'm repeatedly discussing that the WS-10 is not that widely used like they assume (J-20 for example) ... but here they are surely correct.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseLuver

A link to a blog? Lol. Perm ban is imminent for just disrespecting the rules and a well respected moderator of several forums.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Alpha Fighter

Beast said:


> That is not what you say, you say PLAAF still needs to import Russian engine and J-11B series can't survive with Russia import. But I have prove you wrong and you are in constant denied without any concrete backing.


I didn't say that , u need gud engines for planes which can give you gud depth and reliability that's why asked Russian engines and Russian forced u to buy buying SU35. So why you buying SU35, if u have engines and 5th gen planes.?



Deino said:


> It's simply a matter of facts: You may be correct that the true background behind that sale is to get hands on the 117S engine, but surely not since the WS-10A is unreliable, underpowered or has a weak TBO - and that's what You claimed - but more related to TVC and the higher thrust to be used for the J-20 ... maybe.
> 
> By the way it's funny that You call out on "me and my Chinese friends", since esp. with a few here I'm repeatedly discussing that the WS-10 is not that widely used like they assume (J-20 for example) ... but here they are surely correct.
> 
> Deino


yes , so reliability of engine is doubt that why Chinese want 117S engines , isn't ? if they have engine technology they can build engines and tweak engine.

once you master engine technology u can build engines easily. So Plane buying is for engines only.



ChineseLuver said:


> A link to a blog? Lol. Perm ban is imminent for just disrespecting the rules and a well respected moderator of several forums.


well wanna see news link?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-military-engines-idUSKCN0V7083
http://thediplomat.com/2016/09/china-to-receive-4-su-35-fighter-jets-from-russia-in-2016/

But everyone saying one thing " Su-35 forced by Russia to China for 117 engines." .


----------



## Deino

You simply don't get it !??? Don't You ?

Aiming indeed for the 117S might be correct but not - and again, that's what You claimed - due to poor reliability issues of the WS-10. I'm sure also the USA and Europe would be interested in that engine ... so do they have unrealible engines too ??

Stay at least to Your own statements.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

Alpha Fighter said:


> I didn't say that , u need gud engines for planes which can give you gud depth and reliability that's why asked Russian engines and Russian forced u to buy buying SU35. So why you buying SU35, if u have engines and 5th gen planes.?
> 
> 
> yes , so reliability of engine is doubt that why Chinese want 117S engines , isn't ? if they have engine technology they can build engines and tweak engine.
> 
> once you master engine technology u can build engines easily. So Plane buying is for engines only.
> 
> 
> well wanna see news link?
> http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-military-engines-idUSKCN0V7083
> http://thediplomat.com/2016/09/china-to-receive-4-su-35-fighter-jets-from-russia-in-2016/
> 
> But everyone saying one thing " Su-35 forced by Russia to China for 117 engines." .



Its for PAF, not for PLAAF. There is no clause in the 24 SU-35 sales claiming additional 117S engine will be bought. You mean we bought 24 Su-35 and take out all engine and just let the engine less Su-35 airframe rot there?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Alpha Fighter

Deino said:


> You simply don't get it !??? Don't You ?
> 
> Aiming indeed for the 117S might be correct but not - and again, that's what You claimed - due to poor reliability issues of the WS-10. I'm sure also the USA and Europe would be interested in that engine ... so do they have unrealible engines too ??
> 
> Stay at least to Your own statements.


Well, if u please read the link of the articles I provided u will understand the whole thing. PR exercise is one thing and real life reality is another.

We will see when WS-10 make out of china , may be in 10-15 yrs later.



Beast said:


> Its for PAF, not for PLAAF. There is no clause in the 24 SU-35 sales claiming additional 117S engine will be bought. You mean we bought 24 Su-35 and take out all engine and just let the engine less Su-35 airframe rot there?


Oh man u have problem in understand things, read the link you will understand why Chinese need 117 engines desperately and how Russia sold whole plane and then came up with better question and logics.

https://tiananmenstremendousachievements.wordpress.com/tag/117s-engine/


----------



## Deino

Alpha Fighter said:


> Well, if u please read the link of the articles I provided u will understand the whole thing. PR exercise is one thing and real life reality is another.
> 
> We will see when WS-10 make out of china , may be in 10-15 yrs later.




Again that's not the point and by the way this link You gave is more or less an exact copy - at least content-wise - to the original link posted at Sputnik ... so what will You expect?

Point is that China bought some Su-35 from Russia, maybe to strengthen the industrial or military ties, the technical cooperation and maybe simply since they are so much greedy on the 117S. Anyway.
But Your claim that the WS-10 are only for show, that they are unreliable prototypes is simply not correct ... and if China would like to sell the WS-10 is another completely irrelevant issue.

So either admit at least what You wrote by Your own and stick to the facts ... and stay on topic.

Otherwise face the consequences.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## eldamar

u guys are wasting time on him. It's apparent some1 is jealous his own country fails at making engines and *gives up for good
( http://www.oneindia.com/bengaluru/o...roject-gtre-gets-revival-package-1565505.html )*

and starts displaying a typical episode of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection .

_*"Psychological projection* is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1] For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting."



*= i know my country sucks bigtime at making engines, but my ego and nationalism warrants me to accuse another country that mine has a 1-sided rivlary to of also sucking at making engines, just so that my country does'nt look bad.





*_

Thus he will always pray and hope that China never succeeds to make any good engines when the matured WS-10A has already powered the J-11 for years, while the WS-13 has been flying on the JF-17.
Even the Engine programs has already branched out with the devlopment of the WS-15 for J-20, WS-18 for the H-6 bomber series and WS-20 for the Y-20 in the works.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Alpha Fighter

Deino said:


> Again that's not the point and by the way this link You gave is more or less an exact copy - at least content-wise - to the original link posted at Sputnik ... so what will You expect?
> 
> Point is that China bought some Su-35 from Russia, maybe to strengthen the industrial or military ties, the technical cooperation and maybe simply since they are so much greedy on the 117S. Anyway.
> But Your claim that the WS-10 are only for show, that they are unreliable prototypes is simply not correct ... and if China would like to sell the WS-10 is another completely irrelevant issue.
> 
> So either admit at least what You wrote by Your own and stick to the facts ... and stay on topic.
> 
> Otherwise face the consequences.
> 
> Deino


oh Man u still didn't got it. 117 engines are bought because chine might will place them on SCS where short run take off possible only in these engines .

A) High MTBF of engines means they can be on long range of petrol cross south china sea for longer duration.

After a couple of yes u will see which engines are deployed and SCS and what PAK get.


now ,

https://www.rt.com/news/fifth-generation-j-20-russian-engine-261/

"Despite the fact that China tries to sell clones of the Russian jets at discount prices on the international arms market ($10 million for a J-11, while the Russian original Su-27 is well over $30 million),* China continues to buy Russian engines and certain parts of these engines in quantities that far exceed the necessity to do routine maintenance of the Russian planes they use."

now above article is from house mouth says a lot .*


----------



## Mugwop

Alpha Fighter said:


> who are bashing just asked the figures of engines which might not come.


There's no need to bash,We have a separate thread for that


----------



## Deino

Oh my god ! A trashy report from 2012 !!!

Your point is moot ... PLANAF birds are already patrolling across the SCS, so the reliability and MTBO seems at least to be fine.

But again, stick to the topic and Your own posts and do not fabricate certain issues that don't exist only to derail this thread.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## eldamar

eldarlmari said:


> u guys are wasting time on him. It's apparent some1 is jealous his own country fails at making engines and gives up for good(and almost every other military toys, including even simple small arms like guns) and starts displaying a typical episode of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection .
> 
> Thus he will always pray and hope that China never succeeds to make any good engines when the matured WS-10A has already powered the J-11 for years, while the WS-13 has been flying on the JF-17.
> Even the Engine programs has already branched out with the devlopment of the WS-15 for J-20, WS-18 for the H-6 bomber series and WS-20 for the Y-20 in the works.



Some stuff to add on:

1)WS-10A has also been flying on the J-16 since 2011 and is now being upgraded with the WS-10B

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Alpha Fighter

Deino said:


> Oh my god ! A trashy report from 2012 !!!
> 
> Your point is moot ... PLANAF birds are already patrolling across the SCS, so the reliability and MTBO seems at least to be fine.
> 
> But again, stick to the topic and Your own posts and do not fabricate certain issues that don't exist only to derail this thread.
> 
> Deino


well since 2008 Chinese Nego for engine going on/ SU- 35...So post from 2012 seem u feel old but asking for engine from 2008 do not seems ODD? 

What is said they doing petrol but at what expense? 

let quote u an example, A Chinese fishing boat can also do petrol and if china buying destroyer for SCS , you are aka saying china has capability of petrol in SCS why they need destroyer for that and they doing petrol now also.


----------



## eldamar

dun feed the troll man. His arguments are going towards the direction of being more and more ridiculous.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## phancong

Deino said:


> @Alpha Fighter !
> 
> Stopp, immedaetly ! If You want to troll around and continue, then go and search for another forum or face the consequences.
> 
> This thread is on Su-35-sales to china and not again to bash Chinese engine reliability or anything else.
> By the way get at least the facts correct: The WS-10A is a matured and reliable engine; PERIOD and regardless that Western engines have a higher service live of TBO.
> These characteristics may be lower than You like but they seem high enough for the PLAAF and PLANAF since there are already several hundreds in service and since some years not a single operational J-11B and BS Flanker was powered by a Russian AL-31F anymore.
> 
> So simply shut up.
> 
> Deino



Just ban him from this thread if he just trolled on this thread. Nothing to further discuss,

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## eldamar

phancong said:


> Just ban him from this thread if he just trolled on this thread. Nothing to further discuss,



he atually had the audacity to argue with a mod lol. If this were other defence forums, he would had been banned instantly.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Ultima Thule

Alpha Fighter said:


> well since 2008 Chinese Nego for engine going on/ SU- 35...So post from 2012 seem u feel old but asking for engine from 2008 do not seems ODD?
> 
> What is said they doing petrol but at what expense?
> 
> let quote u an example, A Chinese fishing boat can also do petrol and if china buying destroyer for SCS , you are aka saying china has capability of petrol in SCS why they need destroyer for that and they doing petrol now also.


go concern Eindia first, than concern others, you are trolling, i am reporting you

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Brainsucker

pakistanipower said:


> go concern Eindia first, than concern others, you are trolling, i am reporting you



Why? A mod has been aware about this. I believe that Deino capable enough to handle this matter. Whatever he will be banned or not, that depend on Deino's judgement. Just let him be

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## jaiind

could any one of you let me know why china is getting su 35 when they proclaimed their J series matured !!


----------



## nang2

jaiind said:


> could any one of you let me know why china is getting su 35 when they proclaimed their J series matured !!


You should follow Chinese military news more closely. Even J series are still evolving. It never hurts to learn from others' improvement.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brainsucker

jaiind said:


> could any one of you let me know why china is getting su 35 when they proclaimed their J series matured !!



China needs more than the number of aircraft they can produce. Plus, SU-35S is not a bad fighter. So what wrong with it?


----------



## Cyberian

You never know, these could be sold off to Pakistan if and when India can afford to purchase the Rafale aircrafts.


----------



## Ultima Thule

SUPARCO said:


> You never know, these could be sold off to Pakistan if and when India can afford to purchase the Rafale aircrafts.


impossible sir, than why we wouldn't induct J-11B because it is unlicensed copy of Su-27 and its engine is also prohibited by the Russian to the third party and don't quote RD-93 thingy


----------



## jaiind

nang2 said:


> You should follow Chinese military news more closely. Even J series are still evolving. It never hurts to learn from others' improvement.


you claiming that J series is evolving which has 4 gen characteristics ,but your people proclaiming more about a 5 gen fighter jet!!


----------



## eldamar

jaiind said:


> could any one of you let me know why china is getting su 35 when they proclaimed their J series matured !!



Could you find a source that the Defence ministry of China has confirmed that they have signed the Su-35 deal already? 

Please dont quote Western/Russian 'pseudo-propaganda, company stock-boosting' sources

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nang2

jaiind said:


> you claiming that J series is evolving which has 4 gen characteristics ,but your people proclaiming more about a 5 gen fighter jet!!


I am not claiming anything. J series is a live project that continuously evolves. That is all. I am not even familiar with the term "gen" since I have no interest in comparing "sizes". People can claim whatever they like.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cirr



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## IblinI

cirr said:


>


Su35 in PLA!?


----------



## Deino

cirr said:


>




IMO clearly a FAKE ... photoshopped from this J-16-image posted in February 2016 !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## S10

This talk of buying Su-35 started when I graduated high school. I have since completed my university degree and changed job twice after that. It's been a decade already and still this deal hasn't materialized.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

Another idiot came out with yet another faked Chinese Su-35 ... this time based on two Kazakh Su-30SMs  

I really do not understand why these kids are thinking that they can fool us here????? 

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## nang2

Deino said:


> Another idiot came out with yet another faked Chinese Su-35 ... this time based on two Kazakh Su-30SMs
> 
> I really do not understand why these kids are thinking that they can fool us here?????
> 
> Deino
> 
> View attachment 341403
> View attachment 341404


There are always such a group of people in the world who consider lying as a virtue.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## WarFariX

the thing is there are no pic yet


----------



## Pepsi Cola

A new shipment of Russian-made Sukhoi Su-35 multirole fighter aircraft soon to be delivered to China will be fitted with onboard readout systems that display data in Russian.

The onboard systems of the military aircraft which are expected to be delivered to China by the end of the year will be essentially configured the same way as the warplanes supplied to the Russian Aerospace Forces.

While the Su-35 aircraft exported to China will be fitted with BeiDou onboard navigation system modules, all of the planes’ readout systems will be displaying data in Russian. Givi Janjgava, Deputy CEO of the Radio-Electronic Technology Concern (KRET), a Rostec subsidiary, told Russian newspaper Izvestia that the decision to supply Su-35 aircraft to China in this particular configuration was made by the customer. "Adapting onboard systems in accordance with our customer's national specifications is one of the most important technical procedures. We spent the entire year translating all data readout systems in the cockpit into Chinese. However, unlike Cyrillic and Latin inscriptions, hieroglyphics are hard to read from LCD screens. Therefore, the Chinese side requested that we leave everything 'as is', considering that PLA pilots already have experience in flying Russian Su-27s with cockpits not adapted for China, and learned to 'read' onboard information in Russian," Janjgava said. He explained that Su-35 features a glass cockpit, with LCD screens replacing traditional analog dials and gauges. However, data presented on Su-35 screens in Chinese hieroglyphs is too small and blurred to be legible. While the problem could have technically been solved by installing bigger displays, it would have essentially required remodeling the entire cockpit thus requiring additional funding and more time for testing and development. Therefore, after considering the situation and consulting with PLA pilots, the Chinese side decided to leave things as is, and use the Russian ‘configuration’ of the aircraft without any alterations. Russian Aerospace Forces currently employ 48 Sukhoi-35S multirole fighter aircraft. However, due to the aircraft’s exemplary performance during the airborne campaign in Syria, Russian military decided to requisition 50 additional warplanes of this type. At the present time, China intends to receive 24 Su-35 fighters.

Credit: Sputnik

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lcloo

You will soon hear over radio waves Russian speaking pilots in flankers patrolling seas of China's coasts.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## eldamar

im astonished at the level these Russian media has gone to in fabricating company stock-boosting stories. it sounded pretty authentic.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zarvan

Su-35 Jets To Get New Irbis-E Radar Control Systems
- A +
Chinese Su-35 jets contracte from Russia have been offered the Irbis-E radar and RSUO weapons control system which will transform the fighter jets into formidable airborne killing machines.

Concern Radio-Electronic Technologies (KRET), part of State Corporation Rostec, is ready to provide new Irbis-E radar control systems for Su-35 fighters that will be exported from Russia.

“We are ready to equip these SU-35s with a complete set of avionics including airborne radars, control systems, all sensors and a new EW system,” said Vladimir Mikheev, Advisor to First Deputy CEO of KRET.

These fighters will receive newest Irbis-E systems, which provide detection, tracking and coordinate measurement of air, ground, and surface targets, day-and-night, in all weather conditions in the presence of natural noise and jamming.

The fighters also get the RSUO weapon management system, which has special-purpose hardware to identify the condition of weapons aboard the aircraft and control their loading management.

Among other systems – an electronic countermeasures release system that provides protection for the jet from "air-to-air" guided missiles and ground-launched missiles with the help of interference cartridges, a set of flight control levers and sticks for the aircraft and its engines based on HOTAS, which operates by forming analog, manual control signals and issuing single commands, and a SAP active jamming station.

http://www.defenseworld.net/news/17...ew_Irbis_E_Radar_Control_Systems#.WBiGdNR95kg

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TeesraIndiotHunter

It'll be great to test out JFTs against these beasts. Superior than anything India has. It will tell us our real capabilities.


----------



## Deino

Zarvan said:


> Su-35 Jets To Get New Irbis-E Radar Control Systems
> 
> http://www.defenseworld.net/news/17516/Chinese_Su_35_Jets_To_Get_New_Irbis_E_Radar_Control_Systems#.WBiGdNR95kg



*@Zarvan .... Plaese do me a favour, do a bit of a search in advance before You start a new thread and I know You know it too.

We have already a dedicated thread for the PLAAF-Su-35-issue and similar we other so many other threads for the ones You always start new.

It's indeed a bloody mess to always merge and sort out ... 
Thanks in advance.*

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## onebyone

Russia has not formally signed a contract to sell the Sukhoi Su-35S Flanker-E and S-400 surface-to-air missile system to China. Right now, Moscow has only agreed in principle to sell those advanced weapons to China.

“First of all, let’s be accurate. We have not sold yet,” said retired Lt. Gen. Evgeny Buzhinsky (Ret.), chairman of the executive board of Russia’s PIR Center, during a lunch event at the Center for the National Interest on Nov. 15. “We are in the process of very tough and very difficult negotiations on these issues.”

The Russians and the Chinese have made the decision on the sale in principle, but the deals are not finalized. However, in the meantime, the Kremlin and the Chinese leadership have signed an agreement to protect Russian intellectual property—which Moscow hopes will prevent Beijing from stealing its technology. “The principle decisions on S-400 is taken—the principle decision on Su-35 is taken,” Buzhinsky said. “We signed the protection of intellectual property agreement, which was a precondition for the supply of Su-35.”

But Russia is well aware that an agreement with China to protect its intellectual property might well be meaningless. Buzhinsky said that Russia is not about to hand over the crown jewels of its technology to China without taking precautions. The Chinese version of the Su-35 will not be the same as the one used by the Russian Air Force. “We have export version and a version for our own use,” Buzhinsky said. “The Chinese are very good at copying all kinds of stuff.”

Nonetheless, Russia is confident that its technology will be safe in Chinese hands—particularly the all-important Saturn AL-41F1S engine. “They cannot produce engines,” Buzhinsky said. “We agreed to supply engines for the Su-35, but fortunately—my technical colleagues told me—that it is practically impossible to copy that engine because it is practically impossible just to reach the heart of the engine without breaking it completely.”


China is expected to purchase 24 advanced Su-35s from Russia—but most observers believe that Beijing’s motive is to harvest those aircraft for their technology. While Beijing is working on developing advanced stealth fighter aircraft such as the J-20 and J-31, the Chinese have proven to be woefully behind in developing jet propulsion technology. Indeed, the J-20 is known to use Russian Salut AL-31FN engines—which were originally designed to power variants of the Russian Su-27 Flanker.

While Moscow is confident that China will not be able to pick the Su-35 and S-400 clean of their advanced technology, Beijing has proven to be remarkably adept at technology theft. It remains to be seen if the Kremlin’s safeguards will be effective in preventing the Chinese from reverse engineering the S-400, Su-35 and its engines. Only time will tell. 

_Dave Majumdar is the defense editor for the _National Interest_. You can follow him on Twitter: _@davemajumdar_.
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/th...-china-are-still-negotiating-sale-su-35-18419
_

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Beast

I think its more of Russian trying hard to sell those things to China rather than the delay of sales due to intellectual property stuff.

But end of the day, I believe Su-35 sales will goes through and it will be station at Gwadar port. 

Not so sure of S-400.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Globenim

onebyone said:


> Russia has not formally signed a contract to sell the Sukhoi Su-35S Flanker-E and S-400 surface-to-air missile system to China. Right now, Moscow has only agreed in principle to sell those advanced weapons to China.
> 
> “First of all, let’s be accurate. We have not sold yet,” said retired Lt. Gen. Evgeny Buzhinsky (Ret.), chairman of the executive board of Russia’s PIR Center, during a lunch event at the Center for the National Interest on Nov. 15. “We are in the process of very tough and very difficult negotiations on these issues.”



So we went back from another thousand XX SU-35 sold for YY Billions, comittment to deliver and Russia to deliver next months gossip papers spamed on PDF, to nothing signed or any negotiations finalized yet again? 

Looks like China doesnt really "need" them as much as Indian poster like to interprete into the negotiations after all.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## S10

I honestly don't think China will buy Su-35 now, if there was any plan to begin with. Russia media started tossing around the idea just right after I graduated high school. It's now been 12 years since. Operationally, China already has J-10C, J-16 and J-20. There is just no requirement for Su-35.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## lcloo

Technologically there isn't much SU-35 can offers now, but as a show of political support for Russia, China might still sign the deal. Also money for the aircraft purchase will help Russia ease a bit on their financial situation.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Deino

S10 said:


> I honestly don't think China will buy Su-35 now, if there was any plan to begin with. Russia media started tossing around the idea just right after I graduated high school. It's now been 12 years since. Operationally, China already has J-10C, J-16 and J-20. There is just no requirement for Su-35.




I hope this will not once again lead to biased controversies, but I think there is indeed still a certain requirement for the Su-35 in China:

First of all each and every foreign purchase must be seen as a complete package, that not only includes a certain operational requirement (here I agree) but also the technical and most of all political input to this contract.
That means simply looking at an aircraft's performance - like in a quartets game - and to ignore everything around is plain stupid. A prime example is why the J-10 so far no export order, why the Rafale - and no-one denies its capabilities - had so many problems to secure an export order.

Therefore I think the whole package is right: it is a bolt political statement from China to assure the Sino-Russian partnership in quite difficult times for Russia, it also has a technical component; namely China get's hands on Russia's latest avionics and propulsion ... and esp. the engine is IMO the most important part since it give the PLAAF for the first time an operational engine with TVC so that the PLAAF can immediately begin to explore its capabilities and develop own operational doctrines.

IMO still worth ...

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## JSCh

*Russia to Deliver Su-35 Fighter Jets to China on Schedule*
14:05 23.11.2016

*Russia will stick to the schedule on supplying Su-35 fighter jets to China under a military-technical deal between the two countries, Khabarovsk Territory's Governor Vyacheslav Shport told Sputnik on Wednesday.*

MOSCOW (Sputnik) — In September, the governor said that the Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aircraft Production Association (KnAAPO), part of the Sukhoi Aviation Holding Company and one of Russia's largest aircraft manufacturers, plans to supply four Su-35 to China by the end of the year.

"I can say that today, all issues of supplying aircraft equipment as part of military-technical cooperation are proceeding strictly on schedule at the aviation enterprise located on the Khabarovsk Territory, and will be complete before the deadline specified in the contract. It's under my supervision," Shport said.

Earlier in November, the head of the Russian Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation (FSMTC) said that deliveries had not yet started but that the deal's implementation was underway.

Russia and China signed a contract on the delivery of 24 Russian Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets, estimated to be worth $2 billion, in 2015.

The Su-35 (NATO reporting name Flanker-E) is a 4++ generation aircraft employing technologies of the fifth generation, designed by the Sukhoi Aviation Holding Company. The fighter jet is an upgraded version of the Su-27 multirole fighter. It was first introduced to a foreign audience at the 2013 Paris Air Show.
https://sputniknews.com/military/201611231047746741-su35-china-delivery/


Russia to Deliver Su-35 Fighter Jets to China on Schedule

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Beast

JSCh said:


> *Russia to Deliver Su-35 Fighter Jets to China on Schedule*
> 14:05 23.11.2016
> 
> *Russia will stick to the schedule on supplying Su-35 fighter jets to China under a military-technical deal between the two countries, Khabarovsk Territory's Governor Vyacheslav Shport told Sputnik on Wednesday.*
> 
> MOSCOW (Sputnik) — In September, the governor said that the Komsomolsk-on-Amur Aircraft Production Association (KnAAPO), part of the Sukhoi Aviation Holding Company and one of Russia's largest aircraft manufacturers, plans to supply four Su-35 to China by the end of the year.
> 
> "I can say that today, all issues of supplying aircraft equipment as part of military-technical cooperation are proceeding strictly on schedule at the aviation enterprise located on the Khabarovsk Territory, and will be complete before the deadline specified in the contract. It's under my supervision," Shport said.
> 
> Earlier in November, the head of the Russian Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation (FSMTC) said that deliveries had not yet started but that the deal's implementation was underway.
> 
> Russia and China signed a contract on the delivery of 24 Russian Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets, estimated to be worth $2 billion, in 2015.
> 
> The Su-35 (NATO reporting name Flanker-E) is a 4++ generation aircraft employing technologies of the fifth generation, designed by the Sukhoi Aviation Holding Company. The fighter jet is an upgraded version of the Su-27 multirole fighter. It was first introduced to a foreign audience at the 2013 Paris Air Show.
> 
> 
> Russia to Deliver Su-35 Fighter Jets to China on Schedule


Right on track.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

via KURYER :


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/801671543164141568

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

PS ....


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/801812990089633792

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## grey boy 2

Chinese pilots SU-35 training frequency has been picking up lately, looks like delivery date is approaching soon (中国飞行员试飞苏35的频次越发上升，苏35战机来华之日或许已经不远)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cirr

Introduction/induction of Su-35 and S-400 in serious doubt 






PLAAF test pilots are said to be unhappy with the performances of Su-35 and as a result the PLAAF has opted for accelerated deployment of J-16.

Ditto S-400 (with HQ-9B achieving effective range of 300km and HQ-19 performances far exceeding expectations).

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Akasa

cirr said:


> Introduction/induction of Su-35 and S-400 in serious doubt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLAAF test pilots are said to be unhappy with the performances of Su-35 and as a result the PLAAF has opted for accelerated deployment of J-16.
> 
> Ditto S-400 (with HQ-9B achieving effective range of 300km and HQ-19 performances far exceeding expectations).



Thanks for the update, but isn't the HQ-9B still under development (where did you get the 300 km figure from)? And also, isn't the HQ-19 a THAAD counterpart rather than a SAM type missile?

But interesting.


----------



## grey boy 2

cirr said:


> Introduction/induction of Su-35 and S-400 in serious doubt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLAAF test pilots are said to be unhappy with the performances of Su-35 and as a result the PLAAF has opted for accelerated deployment of J-16.
> 
> Ditto S-400 (with HQ-9B achieving effective range of 300km and HQ-19 performances far exceeding expectations).



Great news, it proved our own weapon systems can be as effective if not better than foreign ones
And i believed we should not providing anymore information to those anti-Chinese fishermen 
You just can't keep posting China bashing bs and at the same time expecting information in return

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## conworldus

Good. I always thought the Su-35 was all hype. Russia doesn't have much to sell to China anymore and this confirms it. Russian equipment has always failed against western ones in real combat, and of course blames were always shifted to the users. To counter the threat from the US, China must rely on indigenous development not Russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rcrmj

SinoSoldier said:


> Thanks for the update, but isn't the HQ-9B still under development (where did you get the 300 km figure from)? And also, isn't the HQ-19 a THAAD counterpart rather than a SAM type missile?
> 
> But interesting.


HHQ-9B are already on 52D, its a beast if not the best in the world````back in 2013, 052C with 346 AESA radar and HHQ-9 has *successfully intercepted* *5 supersonic missiles (at speed of 3M) simultaneously* ! now you can imagine what 052D with HHQ-9B can do``!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## 帅的一匹

I think 24 Su35 is the last batch of fighter jets we will buy from Russia.


----------



## Akasa

rcrmj said:


> HHQ-9B are already on 52D, its a beast if not the best in the world````back in 2013, 052C with 346 AESA radar and HHQ-9 has *successfully intercepted* *5 supersonic missiles (at speed of 3M) simultaneously* ! now you can imagine what 052D with HHQ-9B can do``!



Is there evidence that the missiles aboard the 052D are the HQ-9B variant rather than an older iteration? Also, I'd imagine that both the Russian and US navies have deployed the S-400 and SM6, respectively, both of which outstrip the HHQ-9 significantly in terms of range, speed, and engagement capabilities.


----------



## rcrmj

Su-35 is a good plane, but not a superb plane as Russia claimed. buying it will always be helpful to SAC's projects on flanker's variants.

For past few years, the biggest headache for SAC is the structural design, ruggedness and resilience of J-11B/D, J-16 and so on````at end the day, no matter how competent SAC is, Russia is still the birth place of Flanker families```they know it inside out, and have the wit and capability to make it better and better ! this is much worth learning than buying few planes````

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

cirr said:


> Introduction/induction of Su-35 and S-400 in serious doubt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PLAAF test pilots are said to be unhappy with the performances of Su-35 and as a result the PLAAF has opted for accelerated deployment of J-16.
> 
> Ditto S-400 (with HQ-9B achieving effective range of 300km and HQ-19 performances far exceeding expectations).


Doesn't matter they are happy or not. Those su-35 are not for PLAAF in the first place. Eventually, China will buy Su-35 and station them at Gwadar port on behalf of PAF. PLAN already indicated a joint naval patrol of gwadar port with PN will be underway. With navy, surely there will be airforce or naval aviation Joint defense too.

China abide the rules of not exporting any of their domestic made flanker series for the alliance with Russia. If PAF wants flanker , they need to buy from Russia. Exporting J-16 is out of question. Flanker is the type of plane PAF needed. Multi role, long range and deep strike.



rcrmj said:


> Su-35 is a good plane, but not a superb plane as Russia claimed. buying it will always be helpful to SAC's projects on flanker's variants.
> 
> For past few years, the biggest headache for SAC is the structural design, ruggedness and resilience of J-11B/D, J-16 and so on````at end the day, no matter how competent SAC is, Russia is still the birth place of Flanker families```they know it inside out, and have the wit and capability to make it better and better ! this is much worth learning than buying few planes````


China has already surpass all the know how of flanker. I never believe PLAAF buys Su-35 is to study them.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rcrmj

SinoSoldier said:


> Is there evidence that the missiles aboard the 052D are the HQ-9B variant rather than an older iteration? Also, I'd imagine that both the Russian and US navies have deployed the S-400 and SM6, respectively, both of which outstrip the HHQ-9 significantly in terms of range, speed, and engagement capabilities.


no physical proves yet, but 'we' know it ``` you cannot just compare missiles' range and speed to determine its combat effectiveness```its a system, missile is just one part of it! besides they are all in a same category which is *long range air defense missile*, so it is amateur to say one is better than the other. 

missile itself is not a crown piece of science and technology, but the holistic system is. As any country has an advanced industrial capability can make a missile that can fly that long/high/speed, but to make it accurate, efficient and resilient is whole lot different story!



Beast said:


> *China has already surpass all the know how of flanker. I never believe PLAAF buys Su-35 is to study them*.


but those people who are working on flankers from SAC think differ```a plane is not about mounting on arse-kicking radars or weapons```if the structure is weak or flawed, even you have all the best kits on it, it still boils down to nothing

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Akasa

rcrmj said:


> no physical proves yet, but 'we' know it ``` you cannot just compare missiles' range and speed to determine its combat effectiveness```its a system, missile is just one part of it! besides they are all in a same category which is *long range air defense missile*, so it is amateur to say one is better than the other.
> 
> missile itself is not a crown piece of science and technology, but the holistic system is. As any country has an advanced industrial capability can make a missile that can fly that long/high/speed, but to make it accurate, efficient and resilient is whole lot different story!
> 
> 
> but those people who are working on flankers from SAC think differ```a plane is not about mounting on arse-kicking radars or weapons```if the structure is weak or flawed, even you have all the best kits on it, it still boils down to nothing



My skepticism lies in the complete lack of information we have of the HQ-9B. There is no indication that such a missile is close to entering service, much less of it possessing a 300 km range.


----------



## 帅的一匹

The main purpose of buying Su35 is to know where exactly we stand.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rcrmj

SinoSoldier said:


> My skepticism lies in the complete lack of information we have of the HQ-9B. There is no indication that such a missile is close to entering service, much less of it possessing a 300 km range.



you have the right to be skeptical, as there is indeed no solid infos regarding any of China's latest weapon systems, not even any clarity for mass equipped systems like 346, HQ-16A, HHQ-9A, J-10A and etc````and this is how it works in China, but it also applies to U.S and Russia too````those 'obvious' stats are only for public consumption, but army and real professionals they dont have much fuss on them

as i stated earlier, any country with an advanced industrial capability can easily make a missile that can fly/glide for 300KM``even India can do it, so there is no point for you to stuck on this range thing

*[back in 2013, 052C with 346 AESA radar and HHQ-9 has successfully intercepted 5 supersonic missiles (at speed of 3M) simultaneously ! ]--- *this is a real deal that I can tell you, and its back in 2013!

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## 帅的一匹

With J20 at hands, nothing is worth buying except F22 raptors. Stay calm for WS15.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## conworldus

wanglaokan said:


> With J20 at hands, nothing is worth buying except F22 raptors. Stay calm for WS15.



Even the F-22 would need upgrade to match the J-20 in avionics and range, although the frame may be stealthier. The Su-35 would be swatted like flies against 5th gen jets and it is simply not worth the price tag.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## grey boy 2

Latest development: 4 SU-35 will be deliver to China before 12-25-2016 (Christmas present)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JSCh

*Russia to provide first batch of Sukhoi-35 jets to China by mid December — source*
December 14, 14:30 UTC+3 
_Originally the deliveries were to begin as of next year, but eventually a decision was made to speed up the process _

MOSCOW, December 14. /TASS/. Russia will provide to China the first batch of four Sukhoi-35 jets by December 25, 2016, a source within the system of military-technical cooperation with other countries told TASS."The first four Sukhoi-35 are to fly over to China by December 25," the source said.

Originally the deliveries were to begin as of next year, but eventually a decision was made to speed up the process and to provide the first batch in the last days of the outgoing year.

In November, the deputy chief of the federal service for military-technical cooperation, Vladimir Drozhzhov, told TASS that Russia had started acting on the first phase of its contractual liabilities to China to provide the Sukhoi-35 jets.

Russia and China in November 2015 concluded a contract for 24 Sukhoi-35 fighters. Under the $2 billion deal Russia is also to provide ground equipment and spare engines.

As a source within the military-technical cooperation system told TASS earlier, the contract will be effected in three years’ time.

The governor of the Khabarovsk Territory, where the Komsomolsk-on-Amur aircraft building plant (manufacturer of Sukhoi-35 planes) is located, earlier said the first four planes will be provided to China by the end of this year. A short while later, though, the head of Rostec corporation, Sergey Chemezov, said that no Sukhoi-35 planes will be delivered to China in 2016.

The Sukhoi-35 is Russia’s multirole highly maneuverable fighter (generation 4++) with a phased array antenna radar and thrust vectoring engines. It can develop a maximum speed of 2,500 kilometers per hour and fly 3,400 kilometers without refueling. The combat range is 1,600 kilometers. The fighter is armed with a 30-mm gun and has twelve bomb and rocket suspension units.


TASS: Military & Defense - Russia to provide first batch of Sukhoi-35 jets to China by mid December — source

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aziqbal

What a waste of money ! 

That money going to Russia could have been better spent on Chinese aviation industry 

This is a joke puts all the hard work from Chinese engineers into Shame for projects like J20

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 52051

aziqbal said:


> What a waste of money !
> 
> That money going to Russia could have been better spent on Chinese aviation industry
> 
> This is a joke puts all the hard work from Chinese engineers into Shame for projects like J20



Well, even if there is a deal, it should come from a strategic point of view

The trade balance between China and Russia are not very good for Russians, China export industrial products whilst Russia export oil/woods/ore etc.

So from Putin's point of view, this is very sad situation for Russian industry, but the only Russian industry produce is weapon, so on top of oil deal China has to buy some Russian industry products, e.g, weapons, to balance the trade, since unlike China, besides natural resource, weapon export is one major source of income for Russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Globenim

aziqbal said:


> What a waste of money !
> 
> That money going to Russia could have been better spent on Chinese aviation industry
> 
> This is a joke puts all the hard work from Chinese engineers into Shame for projects like J20



Even if that deal really ever manifests, at 24 units for less than 2 billion (since the alleged deal would include other parts and eqipment) thats basically just ditching the last few bits of technology gaps or mere discrepancies with whatever Russia can offer to the foreign market and great transparency over every nation buying them as assets, all at a very cheap price before its loses its last worth to China, with China developing faster than Russia and closing the last few gaps where China isnt already past or on par with Russia.


----------



## aziqbal

What gap ??

When was the last time China bought from Russia any fighter aircraft ??? More than a decade ago 

In that time Chinese aviation has progressed more than ever, in the last 5 years alone they made more progress than previous 15 years 

So why then buy Su35 , for heavens sake J20 just went operational !!!!! 

Very bad

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

I'm very opposed to the arrogant attitude that some among us show toward Russia and their weapon system. Be humble.

Ignore those Indians mocking the Su35 deal, a failed try to degrade Chinese weapon system. Actually they are not happy with us getting Su35.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Akasa

wanglaokan said:


> I'm very opposed to the arrogant attitude that some among us show toward Russia and their weapon system. Be humble.
> 
> Ignore those Indians mocking the Su35 deal, a failed try to degrade Chinese weapon system. Actually they are not happy with us getting Su35.



There's a difference between humility and partaking in an unproductive & potentially-wasteful deal. There are numerous other ways, military or economic, by which China could "show appreciation" towards the Russians.


----------



## 帅的一匹

I'm looking forward the result of J20 field against Su35 in DingXin.



SinoSoldier said:


> There's a difference between humility and partaking in an unproductive & potentially-wasteful deal. There are numerous other ways, military or economic, by which China could "show appreciation" towards the Russians.


Take care of LCA, that's all you have to do.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

wanglaokan said:


> I'm looking forward the result of J20 field against Su35 in DingXin.
> 
> 
> Take care of LCA, that's all you have to do.



The grudge is strong with this one, huh?


----------



## 帅的一匹

SinoSoldier said:


> The grudge is strong with this one, huh?


IAF is gonna have PAKFA, no reason jealous about Chinese Su35. I don't have grudge with you, all the best.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 艹艹艹

*Maybe this is the last time China buys fighter jets from Russia*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

wanglaokan said:


> IAF is gonna have PAKFA, no reason jealous about Chinese Su35. I don't have grudge with you, all the best.



Nobody is "jealous" of a fighter that can't even match the J-11D in terms of BVR combat. And why drag the IAF into this?


----------



## 帅的一匹

long_ said:


> *Maybe this is the last time China buys fighter jets from Russia*


If Russia willing to sell T50, we will buy some for air combat test.


----------



## 艹艹艹

wanglaokan said:


> If Russia willing to sell T50, we will buy some for air combat test.


*If you say so, the Indians will not be happy.




*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

SinoSoldier said:


> Nobody is "jealous" of a fighter that can't even match the J-11D in terms of BVR combat. And why drag the IAF into this?


How do you know the Su35 can't match J11D in the BVR?


----------



## Akasa

wanglaokan said:


> How do you know the Su35 can't match J11D in the BVR?



From a couple of points:
- The J-11D uses an AESA developed by the 14th Institute (NRIET)
- The 14th Institute also won the J-10C's radar contract because *it could pack more T/R modules into a tight radome volume *than the 607th Institute's radars. Keep this note in mind.
- The 607th Institute developed the radar for the J-16, which allegedly (from published documents) could track a *1 m^2 target from 450 km *(supposedly using L-band, but I could be wrong on this account)
- The Su-35's Irbis-E can track a *3 m^2 target from only 350 km*
- The logic goes that if the 607th Institute's radar could already outstrip the Irbis-E in terms of detection range, then a radar from the 14th Institute, which can pack more T/R modules into a certain space, must be on the same level at the very least

Of course, detection range is by no means the only parameter by which radars should be judged, but in terms of BVR warfare, an early detection advantage is essentially what tips the battle in one's favor.

In this assessment I assumed that both the Su-35 and J-11D adopted similar levels of composite materials and radar absorbent coating (although I question how much that would really matter). I also assumed that both aircraft generate enough thrust to meet the power requirements of their respective radar systems.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 帅的一匹

SinoSoldier said:


> From a couple of points:
> - The J-11D uses an AESA developed by the 14th Institute (NRIET)
> - The 14th Institute also won the J-10C's radar contract because *it could pack more T/R modules into a tight radome volume *than the 607th Institute's radars. Keep this note in mind.
> - The 607th Institute developed the radar for the J-16, which allegedly (from published documents) could track a *1 m^2 target from 450 km *(supposedly using L-band, but I could be wrong on this account)
> - The Su-35's Irbis-E can track a *3 m^2 target from only 350 km*
> - The logic goes that if the 607th Institute's radar could already outstrip the Irbis-E in terms of detection range, then a radar from the 14th Institute, which can pack more T/R modules into a certain space, must be on the same level at the very least
> 
> Of course, detection range is by no means the only parameter by which radars should be judged, but in terms of BVR warfare, an early detection advantage is essentially what tips the battle in one's favor.
> 
> In this assessment I assumed that both the Su-35 and J-11D adopted similar levels of composite materials and radar absorbent coating (although I question how much that would really matter). I also assumed that both aircraft generate enough thrust to meet the power requirements of their respective radar systems.


Su35 will fight with J11D and J20 at DingXin, wait and see.


----------



## Beast

wanglaokan said:


> I'm very opposed to the arrogant attitude that some among us show toward Russia and their weapon system. Be humble.
> 
> Ignore those Indians mocking the Su35 deal, a failed try to degrade Chinese weapon system. Actually they are not happy with us getting Su35.


You are lacking in confident of Chinese modern weapon. In fact, it is Russian too arrogant to buy Chinese weapon which is better than anything in Russian arsenal. For example, why Russia buy drone from Israel when cheaper and more devastating UCAV drone can be bought from China? Didn't Russian realized Israel is a very closed allies of US?

By the way, Russian now has problem delivered the 24 Su-35 to PLAAF on time.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 帅的一匹

Beast said:


> You are lacking in confident of Chinese modern weapon. In fact, it is Russian too arrogant to buy Chinese weapon which is better than anything in Russian arsenal. For example, why Russia buy drone from Israel when cheaper and more devastating UCAV drone can be bought from China? Didn't Russian realized Israel is a very closed allies of US?
> 
> By the way, Russian now has problem delivered the 24 Su-35 to PLAAF on time.


 yeh, sometimes Russians are arrogant as well. I still think F117s will do some reference for our TVC engine development. As to Su35, we already have better one suck as J20.


----------



## zestokryl

Primary goal of this deal is , IMO, a favor to Russia, so the Russia is able to advertise Su 35, as a fighter, acquired by China

Secondary is, probably, by the chinese experts to obtain an insight in Su 35s control surfaces system in extreme flight regimes. There was a post about SAC lapping behind the CAC in this department. And, putting up russian radar against various chinese radars. Su 35 is not just one version of Su 27 it is re engineered fuselage and subsystems

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Akasa

zestokryl said:


> Primary goal of this deal is , IMO, a favor to Russia, so the Russia is able to advertise Su 35, as a fighter, acquired by China
> 
> Secondary is, probably, by the chinese experts to obtain an insight in Su 35s control surfaces system in extreme flight regimes. There was a post about SAC lapping behind the CAC in this department. And, putting up russian radar against various chinese radars. Su 35 is not just one version of Su 27 it is re engineered fuselage and subsystems



The deal is more or less about the engines. It makes no sense to have a logistic headache (with incompatible weapons and avionics, after Russia refused China's request to install their own radars and such) if one's goal is simply to expand their current fighter fleet.


----------



## grey boy 2

Su-35 for PLAAF or a PSED one?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

grey boy 2 said:


> Su-35 for PLAAF or a PSED one?



Either PSed or simply a J-11A/Su-27SK.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

grey boy 2 said:


> Su-35 for PLAAF or a PSED one?




Why do You think so ?? It is neither a Su-35 nor a psed J-11, it is plain and simple an old - very old - Su-27SK even with the original old two-digit serials on the front and the small black serial numbers on the tail. It also has the typical cut-out scheme on the radome ! It even has the typical old style single wheel front gear.

I really do not understand why this should be a psed Su-35??

Deino


----------



## grey boy 2

Deino said:


> Why do You think so ?? It is neither a Su-35 nor a psed J-11, it is plain and simple an old - very old - Su-27SK even with the original old two-digit serials on the front and the small black serial numbers on the tail. It also has the typical cut-out scheme on the radome ! It even has the typical old style single wheel front gear.
> 
> I really do not understand why this should be a psed Su-35??
> 
> Deino



I was merely asking for some opinion of the picture i posted, where did i stated its a SU-35 to begin with?
I don't own you any explanation on what so ever and please stop quoting me like every time Beast has posted
I'm not interesting in your type of verbal mud wrestling period, thankyou

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

grey boy 2 said:


> I was merely asking for some opinion of the picture i posted, where did i stated its a SU-35 to begin with?
> I don't own you any explanation on what so ever and please stop quoting me like every time Beast has posted
> I'm not interesting in your type of verbal mud wrestling period, thankyou



Guys, either we have indeed a language issue - what might be true, but can be solved - or I really don't understand why some of again in defence-modus: You said Yourself:



grey boy 2 said:


> Su-35 for PLAAF or a PSED one?



... and so I took this question as a real question You asked: Is this a Su-35 for PLAAF or a PSED one??

And I only said it is not, Yes, I was surprised why You asked that since it is clearly a Su-27SK.

As such there no mud wrestling - in which I am not interested too - but only an answer to Your question. I really don't know what's up with You.

It's exactly the same as with Beast and his question if already a Y-7AWACS took off from the Liaoning during the recent exercise and I gave him an answer ... with the typical result.

Care to explain, why some of You take each and every "answer" that can be deemed a bit of a contra-post to Your own statement is immediately taken as an offence ???

Again, I really agree with You, that I'm also not I'm in any type of verbal mud wrestling,... my intention was simply to answer Your question; thankyou.
Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## CAPRICORN-88

grey boy 2 said:


> Su-35 for PLAAF or a PSED one?



It is all so amusing that folks are speculating on SU-35 which the Russian salesmen is trying so hard to sell to China.

Yes. China will love to acquire this aircraft as well as others if they are available for its ACMI program.

Including the F35 of course. 



zestokryl said:


> Primary goal of this deal is , IMO, a favor to Russia, so the Russia is able to advertise Su 35, as a fighter, acquired by China
> 
> Secondary is, probably, by the chinese experts to obtain an insight in Su 35s control surfaces system in extreme flight regimes. There was a post about SAC lapping behind the CAC in this department. And, putting up russian radar against various chinese radars. Su 35 is not just one version of Su 27 it is re engineered fuselage and subsystems



 That is a good observation. Before China acquired the SU-27 way back in 1990's, no other NATION was interested with SUKHOI warplanes. They only think of the MiGs.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## monitor

#*China* to get 1st batch of Su-35 fighter jets by Christmas http://www.airrecognition.com/index.php/archive-world-worldwide-news-air-force-aviation-aerospace-air-military-defence-industry/global-defense-security-news/global-news-2016/december/3167-china-to-get-first-batch-of-su-35-fighter-jets-by-christmas.html …


----------



## Deino

pssst ... sooner ! ;-)


----------



## Deino

Deino said:


> pssst ... sooner ! ;-)




Like I said ...


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/811578960559669248
... and that's only the prelude !

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Pepsi Cola

Deino said:


> Like I said ...
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/811578960559669248
> ... and that's only the prelude !


this settles it then. Happy Christmas everyone

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## grey boy 2

Looks like not only Chinese pilots but technicians for training as well (第一架售华苏35疑曝光！中国技术人员与其合影)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## aziqbal

Why are the Chinese team looking so happy in front of Su35??

No smiling matter in my opinion 

One step forward two steps back

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

aziqbal said:


> Why are the Chinese team looking so happy in front of Su35??
> 
> No smiling matter in my opinion
> 
> One step forward two steps back



Well, I'm usually the last one to look at the positive side of the Su-35, but here it goes...

1. Su-35s = dissimilar air combat training opportunities, as well as OPFOR
2. They might have been purchased solely for their engines (even though the 145 kN WS-10IPE is already undergoing aerial platform testing)
3. They make excellent airshow material
4. They would be a decent comparator to evaluate (and possibly train) J-11D & J-16 pilots.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aziqbal

So China paid $2 billion for engine ?? 

Doubt it

J20 a 5th generation fighter made at home which is operational but still buying foreign 4th generation fighter 

It's like me buying iPhone 6 for £600 when I already got iPhone 7 for £500 in my pocket


----------



## rcrmj

aziqbal said:


> So China paid $2 billion for engine ??
> 
> Doubt it
> 
> J20 a 5th generation fighter made at home which is operational but still buying foreign 4th generation fighter
> 
> It's like me buying iPhone 6 for £600 when I already got iPhone 7 for £500 in my pocket


you dont need 1000+ Iphones to make calls and sending messages```
Su-35 is a political, economical, military and technical matter````not one alone can make this deal go through``

in terms of military and technical, it has nothing to do with 'filling' production capacity or engine or radar. the real deal is:

1: keeping up with the best kits that neighbors/opponents have (american would love to buy our J-10, 20 and FC-31 if we allow, but that doesnt mean China is more advanced than U.S in terms of aviation)

2: checking out their structural design (for the previous decade, SAC has a big problem of solving flankers structure flaws, especially when they changed almost all the important parts of the plane to domestic made, which made the problem even worse. only recently with the active service of J-15, J-16 and later on J-11D has the problem solved. but they still want to know how Russian's solved this problem with Su-35... in our circle, we call Su-35 the 'ultimate flanker')

to many people here think that an arse kicking plane is because they have arse kicking radars and engines```lol```but in our circle it far from that, if not million miles away from that misconception`! its a *very very very complex issue *that involves hundreds different fields of expertise! 

the best example, not wanting to troll, is LCA, with all the decent parts from various renowned foreign companies, it is still not a decent plane.

in our circle, *the real break through is J-10 and J-20*, they are the real indigenous stuff from scratch, Chinese flankers are, as most western and Indian people like to put, products of 'copy'```indeed we learnt loads of things from flankers```even the armies and top brass wasnt very happy with original flanker's sub systems ```but as a whole, with sophisticated system support, it is indeed an excellent plane!

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## kuge

*cough...coughh...su..35...cough...merry...christmas..cough....


----------



## IblinI

It has finally arrived, Su35+J20, definitely a good year for PLAAF.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tiqiu

The first has just landed on China.





There are two dimensions in the SU35 deal.
Politically, Putin wanted this deal so the money can be put into the T50 program.
Militarily, China could use it for cat and mouse game on the Japan sea and the south China sea without revealing the secret of its main battle jets.
A win win for both.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## grey boy 2

Updates: its here landing on Cangzhou (在沧州降落的)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Place Of Space

aziqbal said:


> So China paid $2 billion for engine ??
> 
> Doubt it
> 
> J20 a 5th generation fighter made at home which is operational but still buying foreign 4th generation fighter
> 
> It's like me buying iPhone 6 for £600 when I already got iPhone 7 for £500 in my pocket



5th generation fighter is like arrow in flight, but the fabrication and maitain costs are very high. 4th and 4.5th generation ones are still the major fleet in present war. China is still producing large number of J10B, J11D and J16 etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cirr



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 帅的一匹

Good!


----------



## Deino

grey boy 2 said:


> Updates: its here landing on Cangzhou (在沧州降落的)




Interesting and if correct, then it is as expected: Like I said for the FTTC !


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/812862293805387776
But why does this bird still has the Russian RF-registration ?


----------



## Place Of Space

grey boy 2 said:


> Updates: its here landing on Cangzhou (在沧州降落的)



小灵通


----------



## Deino

Could it be that this image is an old one showing a Su-35 landing at Zhuhai 2014?


----------



## nature is

rcrmj said:


> you dont need 1000+ Iphones to make calls and sending messages```
> Su-35 is a political, economical, military and technical matter````not one alone can make this deal go through``
> 
> in terms of military and technical, it has nothing to do with 'filling' production capacity or engine or radar. the real deal is:
> 
> 1: keeping up with the best kits that neighbors/opponents have (american would love to buy our J-10, 20 and FC-31 if we allow, but that doesnt mean China is more advanced than U.S in terms of aviation)
> 
> 2: checking out their structural design (for the previous decade, SAC has a big problem of solving flankers structure flaws, especially when they changed almost all the important parts of the plane to domestic made, which made the problem even worse. only recently with the active service of J-15, J-16 and later on J-11D has the problem solved. but they still want to know how Russian's solved this problem with Su-35... in our circle, we call Su-35 the 'ultimate flanker')
> 
> to many people here think that an arse kicking plane is because they have arse kicking radars and engines```lol```but in our circle it far from that, if not million miles away from that misconception`! its a *very very very complex issue *that involves hundreds different fields of expertise!
> 
> the best example, not wanting to troll, is LCA, with all the decent parts from various renowned foreign companies, it is still not a decent plane.
> 
> in our circle, *the real break through is J-10 and J-20*, they are the real indigenous stuff from scratch, Chinese flankers are, as most western and Indian people like to put, products of 'copy'```indeed we learnt loads of things from flankers```even the armies and top brass wasnt very happy with original flanker's sub systems ```but as a whole, with sophisticated system support, it is indeed an excellent plane!



Nicely explained.


----------



## Deino

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/812932084733972480

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

Deino said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/812932084733972480



The latest rumors suggest that the Su-35s have been moved from FTTC to another airbase in the south. So, this is not for an aggressor squadron after all?


----------



## Deino

SinoSoldier said:


> The latest rumors suggest that the Su-35s have been moved from FTTC to another airbase in the south. So, this is not for an aggressor squadron after all?




Interesting ... any more info on what base this could be ?


----------



## Akasa

Deino said:


> Interesting ... any more info on what base this could be ?



2nd Fighter Division of the 6th Squadron, based out of Zhanjiang.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

SinoSoldier said:


> 2nd Fighter Division of the 6th Squadron, based out of Zhanjiang.



Uppps .. that would be an interesting development ! 6. AR, 2. AD would be a replacement of the Su-27SK/UBK & J-11A at Suixi !?




Deino said:


> Could it be that this image is an old one showing a Su-35 landing at Zhuhai 2014?




Like I said, this images was taken at Zhuhai in 2014.







Hmm ...


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/812937434358943744

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/812928659686178816

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Confirmed by the Russian side:

http://www.komcity.ru/news/?id=25068

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

Tiqiu said:


> The first has just landed on China.
> View attachment 363149
> 
> 
> There are two dimensions in the SU35 deal.
> Politically, Putin wanted this deal so the money can be put into the T50 program.
> Militarily, China could use it for cat and mouse game on the Japan sea and the south China sea without revealing the secret of its main battle jets.
> A win win for both.


These Su-35 are for PAF. They will be station at Gwadar port under the disguise of PLAAF but maintained by Pakistan crew. Indian government has stated objection for any major weapon systems by Russia to Pakistan. Russia is just playing the blame push game. China is not allowed to export any of their clone flanker series including J-11B, J-16. The only way for PAF to obtain heavy long range strike fighter is to buy Russia Su-35 which serves China purpose of PAF having the mean to protect Gwadar port and at the same time a deterrent for PAF against India aggression.

China is just acting as a middleman for the whole deal. Why would China need Su-35 when they just inducted J-20. The talk of needing the software and 117S engine looks like a whole joke. The J-20 has installed a more powerful and advance domestic engine. There is no need for 117S engine.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

Ohh please not that nonsense again !! 

The Chinese side will never, never break that contract and deliver these birds to Pakistan.
Why is it so much hurt to accept that this deal - even if not necessary - simply has a political content and as a positive side effect could provide the PLAAF for the first time with an operational use of TCV the J-20 still lacks.

I know some really seem to be obsessed and even more annoyed by that deal ... but Pakistan, NEVER !!

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Akasa

Deino said:


> Ohh please not that nonsense again !!
> 
> The Chinese side will never, never break that contract and deliver these birds to Pakistan.
> Why is it so much hurt to accept that this deal - even if not necessary - simply has a political content and as a positive side effect could provide the PLAAF for the firs time with an operational use of TCV??
> 
> But Pakistan, NEVER !!
> 
> Deino



I would imagine that the Su-35s would make a decent aggressor squadron to complement the upcoming J-11D fitted with WS-10IPE engines.


----------



## Beast

Deino said:


> Ohh please not that nonsense again !!
> 
> The Chinese side will never, never break that contract and deliver these birds to Pakistan.
> Why is it so much hurt to accept that this deal - even if not necessary - simply has a political content and as a positive side effect could provide the PLAAF for the first time with an operational use of TCV the J-20 still lacks.
> 
> I know some really seem to be obsessed and even more annoyed by that deal ... but Pakistan, NEVER !!
> 
> Deino


We shall wait and see!


----------



## 帅的一匹

Beast said:


> These Su-35 are for PAF. They will be station at Gwadar port under the disguise of PLAAF but maintained by Pakistan crew. Indian government has stated objection for any major weapon systems by Russia to Pakistan. Russia is just playing the blame push game. China is not allowed to export any of their clone flanker series including J-11B, J-16. The only way for PAF to obtain heavy long range strike fighter is to buy Russia Su-35 which serves China purpose of PAF having the mean to protect Gwadar port and at the same time a deterrent for PAF against India aggression.
> 
> China is just acting as a middleman for the whole deal. Why would China need Su-35 when they just inducted J-20. The talk of needing the software and 117S engine looks like a whole joke. The J-20 has installed a more powerful and advance domestic engine. There is no need for 117S engine.


Not gonna be possible, you need to have a rest.



SinoSoldier said:


> I would imagine that the Su-35s would make a decent aggressor squadron to complement the upcoming J-11D fitted with WS-10IPE engines.


It will be deployed to the SCS direction, Cang Zhou is just the ferry station. Who will make decent fighter like Su35 serves as dedicated aggressor squadrons, it's too luxurious for PLAAF.


----------



## cnleio

Finally Su-35 joint PLAAF.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## grey boy 2

cnleio said:


> Finally Su-35 joint PLAAF.
> 
> View attachment 363296


Looks great, thanks for sharing bro

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cnleio

grey boy 2 said:


> Looks great, thanks for sharing bro


The Su-35 is a wonderful fighter ... just make China Airforce stronger, China is building the Big Airforce with 1,000~1,500x 3-gen & 4-gen fighters in next years, future PLAAF's J-20, (J-21 maybe), Su-35, Su-30, J-16, J-15, J-11B, J-10B, J-10A fighter numbers will be more than others in the region, those advanced fighters made by China & Russia can face any threat from outside to protect China sky. Just hope China can learn some new tech from this Su-35 deal.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Akasa

cnleio said:


> The Su-35 is a wonderful fighter ... just make China Airforce stronger, China is building the Big Airforce with 1,000~1,500x 3-gen & 4-gen fighters in next years, future PLAAF's J-20, (J-21 maybe), Su-35, Su-30, J-16, J-15, J-11B, J-10B, J-10A fighter numbers will be more than others in the region, those advanced fighters made by China & Russia can face any threat from outside to protect China sky. Just hope China can learn some new tech from this Su-35 deal.



Aside from 117S engines, there's not much the Chinese could "learn" from this aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

SinoSoldier said:


> Aside from 117S engines, there's not much the Chinese could "learn" from this aircraft.



Why ... You Can always learn from a foreign System esp. if it is the second best Russian fighter that offers also a capability - aka TVC - no Chinese fighter offers.


----------



## Akasa

Deino said:


> Why ... You Can always learn from a foreign System esp. if it is the second best Russian fighter that offers also a capability - aka TVC - no Chinese fighter offers.



Yes, that's why I mentioned the 117S engines as a selling point. However, in terms of "reverse engineering", the Su-35 doesn't really offer anything significant that can't be found on any other Chinese-developed Flanker.


----------



## Avicenna

Thanks Santa!

https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-nwMmsaDr...U_IwT1WuGPoLcyTqAm65kKwCPcB/s1600/Su-35SK.jpg

As per Hui Tong, 4 Su-35SK have been delivered.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## IblinI

SinoSoldier said:


> Yes, that's why I mentioned the 117S engines as a selling point. However, in terms of "reverse engineering", the Su-35 doesn't really offer anything significant that can't be found on any other Chinese-developed Flanker.


Structure.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## cnleio

China become the 1st foreign customer to equip Su-35 fighters, other foreign airforces will follow ... Su-35 is a good news to china, a new weapon to protect us, also a bad news to the enemy ... some country's F-35 purchase need hurry up to face China J-20, J-21, Su-35.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## UKBengali

cnleio said:


> China become the 1st foreign customer to equip Su-35 fighters, other foreign airforces will follow ... Su-35 is a good news to china, a new weapon to protect us, also a bad news to the enemy ... some country's F-35 purchase need hurry up to face China J-20, J-21, Su-35.



I still don't get the point of buying SU-35 when China is ready to deploy J-20.
All it does is send a signal that China has no confidence in the J-20.


----------



## Makarena

UKBengali said:


> I still don't get the point of buying SU-35 when China is ready to deploy J-20.
> All it does is send a signal that China has no confidence in the J-20.



It is probably for two reasons, to get the engine tech, and to get better relationship with the russians. Their national security interest are getting more aligned than ever. I wouldn't be surprised if one day they will cement it with formal military alliance treaty.


----------



## Cyberian

Congratulations China. I hope this beautiful bird serves your purposes.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## IblinI

Makarena said:


> It is probably for two reasons, to get the engine tech, and to get better relationship with the russians. Their national security interest are getting more aligned than ever. I wouldn't be surprised if one day they will cement it with formal military alliance treaty.


Credit to Yankesama. I found it the best article for people who has question on the purchase,
if you can read Chinese or ask someone here to translate some key paragraphs.
问题1：苏-35有哪些方面让中国非买不可？

关于苏-35的性能概况，已经有很多公开资料介绍，在此不作赘述。我们先以苏-27家族饱受诟病的“跨音速过载陷阱”问题为例展开分析苏-35的进步。

所谓“跨音速过载陷阱”，是指苏-27系列在跨音速阶段（M0.85-M1.25）飞行时，由于气动中心前移导致飞机不可控的大幅上仰，伴随翼尖失速，会造成非指令性的俯仰荷载突变，导致飞机可用过载降低。这个问题在很多第三代战斗机上都有， 例如法制幻影2000战斗机在中等以上高度的最大稳定盘旋角速度几乎都在M0.9，但当飞机在4000米高度时由于过载限制（速度的平方除以转弯半径再除以重力常数9.8）一下子从7掉到了5，这意味着转弯半径将陡然增加40%，严重影响此时的战术机动性。而苏-27和米格-29由于采用了带有边条翼的高升阻比升力体布局，导致这一影响更为严重（可用过载从将近9G降到6G）。

所以跨音速过载陷阱并不是一个简单的结构问题，单纯靠加强结构是无法根治的。苏-35解决这个问题，靠的是从气动、飞控和结构三个方向同时入手的综合顶层设计：依靠全新的数字式电传飞控系统，以比苏-27的模拟式电传远为灵敏的反应速度，精确控制尺寸有所调整的各个气动舵面和推力矢量喷口协调工作，使得飞机在跨音速飞行、气动中心前移时产生一个与之时刻保持准确平衡的力矩，辅以之前在苏-27M/苏-30上就进行过的机翼结构加强措施，彻底根除了这个“陷阱”。

国内在引进苏-30之后就再没有系统接触过俄罗斯战机的气动-结构-飞控综合设计理念。这也使得在歼-11系列的技术改进上往往有些“头痛医头、脚痛医脚”，导致虽然电子设备和武器系统的性能进步了，但飞行性能相对原准机却难以有明显提高，苏-35的引进在这方面有望为我们进一步打开思路。

在苏联解体后，俄罗斯通过苏-27/30系列的出口发展，验证了包括先是在出口印度的苏-30MKI而后在自用的苏-30SM上运用的三翼面+三元矢量推力喷管在内的多项技术。虽然前者没有在苏-35上保留，但后者和飞控技术的融合成熟却使得苏-35在机动性方面更进一步，2014年珠海航展上令人目眩的“抛饼”机动就是体现。

当然，矢量喷管技术的载体——AL-41F1S（117S）发动机也是苏-35优良机动性的根本保证，这种加力推力达到140-145kn的发动机使得苏-35在起飞重量增加的同时仍然拥有突出的能量机动性能，而全权限数字式控制系统使得其能够在苏-35的飞行包线内都有着最好的发挥。相信了解中国航空发动机发展的人都知道117S对中国的价值，这里就不多谈了。

飞控系统的改进还有一个成果是取消了机背大型减速板。在去掉了这一功能单一的“死重”之后，苏-35的减速将靠两片增大面积的方向舵的反向动作以及其他气动面的配合共同实现。这一点和歼-20的后续原型机相同。而通过取消减速板等措施，苏-35仅内油量就达到了11.5吨，比苏-27/歼-11还多了2.1吨；而且由于该机和苏-34一样还可以外挂副油箱，这使得即使在歼-20服役之后，苏-35的作战半径仍然是中国空军战术飞机中最远的。

打一个最简单的比方，使用标准战斗值班挂载（携带两枚R-77和两枚R-73导弹以及电子干扰吊舱）的苏-35在加满机内燃油并外挂两个1860升副油箱之后，不仅从广东湛江基地直飞南沙群岛空域绰绰有余，还能支持一场耗油剧烈的空战。能够依托保障条件更为完善全面的本土基地出动战机支援岛礁机场上的防卫力量，这对中国空军未来加入对南海主权的维权工作很有价值。

问题2：为何从传言到成为事实拖了这么久？

有关中国可能引进苏-35的传言，早在2002年“老”苏-35，也就是苏-27M项目行将中止时就开始在网上浮现。而从2006年“新”苏-35刚刚提出概念不久俄方就主动向中方推荐该机至今也已经将近10年。是什么原因使得苏-35的引进在不断的传言中几乎成为“狼来了”的故事呢？

首先是苏-35技术完善所需要的过程导致的，毕竟直到2014年苏-35才参加俄军的几次联合军演，今年才算是形成完整作战能力（FOC），而中国显然不会贸然购买一款技术上还有很多不成熟之处的战机。而由于苏-35使用了很多俄罗斯下一代战机T-50的制造技术，诸如大块预制蒙皮和镜像铣表面处理技术等等，厂家从苏-27/30转产苏-35也需要一个调整过程，这从俄罗斯媒体披露头两批量产型苏-35存在不少影响可靠性的问题就能看出。

但在那架俄空军现役的红色08号苏-35由功勋试飞员谢尔盖·博格丹驾驶参加珠海航展并献上让人目瞪口呆的飞行表演之后，很多分析都指出，中方引进苏-35的决心已下，主要矛盾应当是在合同的细节上。而就在航展上，俄国防出口公司总经理伊塞金在谈及中俄苏-35合同时强调，根据双方的共识，苏-35的“外形经过了最小修改，主要体现在外挂层面”；这意味着，中方很可能要求苏-35增加了国产武器的使用能力。

虽然苏-35在气动-结构-飞控一体化设计上的水平确实高于中国现有掌握的技术，但在航电设备和机载武器领域，俄罗斯人就没法如此自信了。苏-35使用的N035/IRBIS-E无源相控阵雷达虽然靠着印度在苏-30MKI的N011M上积累的经验，性能要完善很多，能够满足基本对空作战的要求，但工作体制上的先天劣势使其在可靠性、探测精度、多用途能力和抗干扰能力等方面落后于歼-16和歼-11D上使用的同等尺寸有源相控阵雷达。

在空战武器方面，以霹雳-10和霹雳-15为代表的国产新一代空战武器的服役，使得受发展资金限制，虽然指标吸引眼球、但技术远不够成熟的俄制导弹竞争力不大；在对地精确制导武器方面俄方更是直到最近两三年才有几个新型号投入使用。因此中方在谈判中始终要求苏-35具备国产武器使用能力这一点也就不难理解了。中国空军有着丰富的为苏-27/30战机改装国产武器的经验，这一点无论在谈判中和在合同执行中都十分有利。

所以尽管作为供货方俄罗斯肯定希望能够随机出口更多的武器和备件，但从结果来看，“手头紧”的俄罗斯可能面对现实仍然做出了让步。俄罗斯国家工业和科技集团总经理Sergey Chemezov对这笔“马拉松式”合同的评价是，“在军用飞机交付史上，从未有过这种合同先例。”

问题3：苏-35能否融入现有作战体系？

兼容性问题也是反对引进苏-35的声音常常强调的一大理由。由于中国已经有10年没有引进俄制战机，而在这一时期内大量国产战机的服役使得很多人认为，引进的苏-35将无法融入中国空军的作战体系。笔者试着从这个体系近10年的发展脉络，分析其是否准确。

在2005年-2006年空军作战体系初成的时候，作为体系中的尖刀，三代机部队的主力是引进/组装的170架苏-27/歼-11和70多架苏-30战机，而刚刚服役一年的国产歼-10战机只是其中的一部分。而体系也不是一成不变的，在这个体系发展壮大的过程中，不断有国产新机加入，虽然国产机和引进机在联合使用中确实有过磨合阶段，但在空军科研团队的攻关下，这些问题已经被逐一解决。

从结果上看，兼容问题没有影响到装备苏-27的部队在空警2000预警机的指挥下参加北京奥运会、上海世博会的空中警巡任务；没有影响到装备苏-30的部队在空军体系对抗中和兄弟部队配合屡屡拔得头筹……引进苏-35在子系统层面上确实需要解决如何更好融入的问题，这也是上文提到改装国产武器的一大目的。但这不是以偏概全否定苏-35融入未来中国空军作战体系可能性的理由，能够兼容使用国产武器的苏-35只会使得体系更加强大。

从合同金额上分析，24架苏-35价值20亿美元，平均每架8300多万，这和俄方2014年在珠海航展上宣称的8500万美元的单价相比稍有下降。考虑国际武器贸易的一般原则，计算合同交易额时一般都把备件、武器以及配套的维护和检测设备等计算在内，这一价格也说明配套引进的俄制导弹数量并不会太多。

问题4：苏-35何时形成战斗力？

根据俄罗斯军工综合体公布的苏-35生产厂——阿穆尔河畔共青城厂（KnAAPO）到2020年之前的生产计划，在2016年完成俄军首批48架订单中最后10架之后，将向中国空军交付首批4架（从03批的批尾开始）。而计划内容显示，最晚在2018年这24架战机就将交付完成。

根据我军之前引进苏-27和苏-30战机的传统，确定将引进一型飞机之后，在交付列装前部队会提前至少一年派出空勤地勤人员前往俄罗斯学习新型战机的理论知识和实际操作，以缩短战斗力形成周期。也就是说早在合同正式签订前，甚至是在2014年珠海航展上首次在国内和苏-35“亲密接触”前，中国空军已经对苏-35有了深入的了解。

考虑到这二十多年来国内对三代机乃至“三代半”战机装备系统和使用经验的“食髓知味”，加上换装苏-35的部队自身就很可能有着丰富三代机使用经验；1993年8月我军首个接装苏-27的部队（在此之前他们使用的是和苏-27有着明显代差的歼-7IIA）因换装一年后就形成初始战斗力（IOC），而以师级建制荣立集体一等功的故事或许将以更快的速度重现。

2018年第一个苏-35单位满编并形成战斗力后，或许也将是中国空军考量是否将购买更多的苏-35的时候。24架苏-35相当于空军现行编制一个三代机团/旅的数量，而根据《华尔街日报》等外媒的报道，中方有可能在签订首批苏-35引进合同时，还与俄方就后续48架乃至96架的意向协议进行了商讨。这就引发了最后一个问题，中国会采购这么多的苏-35么？

问题5：为什么有了歼-20还要苏-35？

随着第四代战斗机歼-20的原型机不断试飞，以及歼-10B/C、歼-11D/16等第三代改进型战斗机的亮相服役，反对引进苏-35的声音认为，和它们相比苏-35的优势并不大，面对歼-20还处于劣势，引进苏-35无助于战斗力的提升。

和三代机全面替换二代机不同，在空中力量使用理论产生重要变革，机载航电武器大发展的时代，三代机和四代机并非替代关系，而将配合使用很长时间，即使是目前全球唯一装备有两型四代机的美国空军也是如此。一位美国空军官员11月22日表示，因F-35交付延迟和现有三代机群老化等因素，美国空军将考虑招标采购最多72架全新的三代机。考虑的范围包括先进F-15、新型F-16甚至包括海军的F/A-18E/F，而它们的交付时间将和苏-35交付中国大致相当。

而中国空军的情况则更为复杂。在空军仍有数百架上世纪70年代水平，已经很难适应现代战争要求的歼-7B/H的时候，仅靠成都飞机公司的歼-10和沈阳飞机公司的歼-11两大系列三代机的产能，想在歼-20服役时完成对它们的替换是很难的，届时中国空军很可能将面对二、三、四代机“三代同堂”的场面。而随着苏-35生产技术的逐步成熟，KnAAPO的生产速度也在提高，如果中国决定采购后续批次，那么到2020年的时候第二个单位的苏-35就能满编。

当然产能因素仅仅是一个方面，前面提到的苏-35在部分技战术指标上的突出性也是引进的重要考量。例如尽管苏-35优秀的格斗机动性被认为在这个超视距空战大行其道的年代是“屠龙之技”，但发挥这一性能的关键——融合了气动舵面和推力矢量综合控制的飞控系统，可能对歼-20等型号未来的性能完善产生重大影响。

和24年前引进划时代的苏-27时完全的惊为天人相比，今天的中国在引进苏-35时的眼光将更加客观务实。发挥其技战术指标特长提升空军转型期的战斗力，吃透其关键子系统的技术为我所用，苏-35将成为2020年之后彻底淘汰老旧二代机（除少数二代后期型之外），数量达1000架以上的三代机与四代机并存的中国空军中一块重要的装备拼图

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## 帅的一匹

Can anyone translate this into English, this is the best article explain the value of induction Su35 ever. @Beast will you demean Su35 induction ever since? The article proves everything.

It demonstrates how important TVC is!


----------



## rcrmj

SinoSoldier said:


> Yes, that's why I mentioned the 117S engines as a selling point. However, in terms of "reverse engineering", the Su-35 doesn't really offer anything significant that can't be found on any other Chinese-developed Flanker.


has nothing to do with the engine or radar ```can you and that Beast guy stop these nonsense will you?


----------



## shjliu

Makarena said:


> It is probably for two reasons, to get the engine tech, and to get better relationship with the russians. Their national security interest are getting more aligned than ever. I wouldn't be surprised if one day they will cement it with formal military alliance treaty.





Makarena said:


> It is probably for two reasons, to get the engine tech, and to get better relationship with the russians. Their national security interest are getting more aligned than ever. I wouldn't be surprised if one day they will cement it with formal military alliance treaty.


I don't think China will be "in alliance" with any other country, even with Pakistan. it is in China's policy.


----------



## CHINA83NEWS

YuChen said:


> Credit to Yankesama. I found it the best article for people who has question on the purchase,
> if you can read Chinese or ask someone here to translate some key paragraphs.
> 问题1：苏-35有哪些方面让中国非买不可？
> 
> 关于苏-35的性能概况，已经有很多公开资料介绍，在此不作赘述。我们先以苏-27家族饱受诟病的“跨音速过载陷阱”问题为例展开分析苏-35的进步。
> 
> 所谓“跨音速过载陷阱”，是指苏-27系列在跨音速阶段（M0.85-M1.25）飞行时，由于气动中心前移导致飞机不可控的大幅上仰，伴随翼尖失速，会造成非指令性的俯仰荷载突变，导致飞机可用过载降低。这个问题在很多第三代战斗机上都有， 例如法制幻影2000战斗机在中等以上高度的最大稳定盘旋角速度几乎都在M0.9，但当飞机在4000米高度时由于过载限制（速度的平方除以转弯半径再除以重力常数9.8）一下子从7掉到了5，这意味着转弯半径将陡然增加40%，严重影响此时的战术机动性。而苏-27和米格-29由于采用了带有边条翼的高升阻比升力体布局，导致这一影响更为严重（可用过载从将近9G降到6G）。
> 
> 所以跨音速过载陷阱并不是一个简单的结构问题，单纯靠加强结构是无法根治的。苏-35解决这个问题，靠的是从气动、飞控和结构三个方向同时入手的综合顶层设计：依靠全新的数字式电传飞控系统，以比苏-27的模拟式电传远为灵敏的反应速度，精确控制尺寸有所调整的各个气动舵面和推力矢量喷口协调工作，使得飞机在跨音速飞行、气动中心前移时产生一个与之时刻保持准确平衡的力矩，辅以之前在苏-27M/苏-30上就进行过的机翼结构加强措施，彻底根除了这个“陷阱”。
> 
> 国内在引进苏-30之后就再没有系统接触过俄罗斯战机的气动-结构-飞控综合设计理念。这也使得在歼-11系列的技术改进上往往有些“头痛医头、脚痛医脚”，导致虽然电子设备和武器系统的性能进步了，但飞行性能相对原准机却难以有明显提高，苏-35的引进在这方面有望为我们进一步打开思路。
> 
> 在苏联解体后，俄罗斯通过苏-27/30系列的出口发展，验证了包括先是在出口印度的苏-30MKI而后在自用的苏-30SM上运用的三翼面+三元矢量推力喷管在内的多项技术。虽然前者没有在苏-35上保留，但后者和飞控技术的融合成熟却使得苏-35在机动性方面更进一步，2014年珠海航展上令人目眩的“抛饼”机动就是体现。
> 
> 当然，矢量喷管技术的载体——AL-41F1S（117S）发动机也是苏-35优良机动性的根本保证，这种加力推力达到140-145kn的发动机使得苏-35在起飞重量增加的同时仍然拥有突出的能量机动性能，而全权限数字式控制系统使得其能够在苏-35的飞行包线内都有着最好的发挥。相信了解中国航空发动机发展的人都知道117S对中国的价值，这里就不多谈了。
> 
> 飞控系统的改进还有一个成果是取消了机背大型减速板。在去掉了这一功能单一的“死重”之后，苏-35的减速将靠两片增大面积的方向舵的反向动作以及其他气动面的配合共同实现。这一点和歼-20的后续原型机相同。而通过取消减速板等措施，苏-35仅内油量就达到了11.5吨，比苏-27/歼-11还多了2.1吨；而且由于该机和苏-34一样还可以外挂副油箱，这使得即使在歼-20服役之后，苏-35的作战半径仍然是中国空军战术飞机中最远的。
> 
> 打一个最简单的比方，使用标准战斗值班挂载（携带两枚R-77和两枚R-73导弹以及电子干扰吊舱）的苏-35在加满机内燃油并外挂两个1860升副油箱之后，不仅从广东湛江基地直飞南沙群岛空域绰绰有余，还能支持一场耗油剧烈的空战。能够依托保障条件更为完善全面的本土基地出动战机支援岛礁机场上的防卫力量，这对中国空军未来加入对南海主权的维权工作很有价值。
> 
> 问题2：为何从传言到成为事实拖了这么久？
> 
> 有关中国可能引进苏-35的传言，早在2002年“老”苏-35，也就是苏-27M项目行将中止时就开始在网上浮现。而从2006年“新”苏-35刚刚提出概念不久俄方就主动向中方推荐该机至今也已经将近10年。是什么原因使得苏-35的引进在不断的传言中几乎成为“狼来了”的故事呢？
> 
> 首先是苏-35技术完善所需要的过程导致的，毕竟直到2014年苏-35才参加俄军的几次联合军演，今年才算是形成完整作战能力（FOC），而中国显然不会贸然购买一款技术上还有很多不成熟之处的战机。而由于苏-35使用了很多俄罗斯下一代战机T-50的制造技术，诸如大块预制蒙皮和镜像铣表面处理技术等等，厂家从苏-27/30转产苏-35也需要一个调整过程，这从俄罗斯媒体披露头两批量产型苏-35存在不少影响可靠性的问题就能看出。
> 
> 但在那架俄空军现役的红色08号苏-35由功勋试飞员谢尔盖·博格丹驾驶参加珠海航展并献上让人目瞪口呆的飞行表演之后，很多分析都指出，中方引进苏-35的决心已下，主要矛盾应当是在合同的细节上。而就在航展上，俄国防出口公司总经理伊塞金在谈及中俄苏-35合同时强调，根据双方的共识，苏-35的“外形经过了最小修改，主要体现在外挂层面”；这意味着，中方很可能要求苏-35增加了国产武器的使用能力。
> 
> 虽然苏-35在气动-结构-飞控一体化设计上的水平确实高于中国现有掌握的技术，但在航电设备和机载武器领域，俄罗斯人就没法如此自信了。苏-35使用的N035/IRBIS-E无源相控阵雷达虽然靠着印度在苏-30MKI的N011M上积累的经验，性能要完善很多，能够满足基本对空作战的要求，但工作体制上的先天劣势使其在可靠性、探测精度、多用途能力和抗干扰能力等方面落后于歼-16和歼-11D上使用的同等尺寸有源相控阵雷达。
> 
> 在空战武器方面，以霹雳-10和霹雳-15为代表的国产新一代空战武器的服役，使得受发展资金限制，虽然指标吸引眼球、但技术远不够成熟的俄制导弹竞争力不大；在对地精确制导武器方面俄方更是直到最近两三年才有几个新型号投入使用。因此中方在谈判中始终要求苏-35具备国产武器使用能力这一点也就不难理解了。中国空军有着丰富的为苏-27/30战机改装国产武器的经验，这一点无论在谈判中和在合同执行中都十分有利。
> 
> 所以尽管作为供货方俄罗斯肯定希望能够随机出口更多的武器和备件，但从结果来看，“手头紧”的俄罗斯可能面对现实仍然做出了让步。俄罗斯国家工业和科技集团总经理Sergey Chemezov对这笔“马拉松式”合同的评价是，“在军用飞机交付史上，从未有过这种合同先例。”
> 
> 问题3：苏-35能否融入现有作战体系？
> 
> 兼容性问题也是反对引进苏-35的声音常常强调的一大理由。由于中国已经有10年没有引进俄制战机，而在这一时期内大量国产战机的服役使得很多人认为，引进的苏-35将无法融入中国空军的作战体系。笔者试着从这个体系近10年的发展脉络，分析其是否准确。
> 
> 在2005年-2006年空军作战体系初成的时候，作为体系中的尖刀，三代机部队的主力是引进/组装的170架苏-27/歼-11和70多架苏-30战机，而刚刚服役一年的国产歼-10战机只是其中的一部分。而体系也不是一成不变的，在这个体系发展壮大的过程中，不断有国产新机加入，虽然国产机和引进机在联合使用中确实有过磨合阶段，但在空军科研团队的攻关下，这些问题已经被逐一解决。
> 
> 从结果上看，兼容问题没有影响到装备苏-27的部队在空警2000预警机的指挥下参加北京奥运会、上海世博会的空中警巡任务；没有影响到装备苏-30的部队在空军体系对抗中和兄弟部队配合屡屡拔得头筹……引进苏-35在子系统层面上确实需要解决如何更好融入的问题，这也是上文提到改装国产武器的一大目的。但这不是以偏概全否定苏-35融入未来中国空军作战体系可能性的理由，能够兼容使用国产武器的苏-35只会使得体系更加强大。
> 
> 从合同金额上分析，24架苏-35价值20亿美元，平均每架8300多万，这和俄方2014年在珠海航展上宣称的8500万美元的单价相比稍有下降。考虑国际武器贸易的一般原则，计算合同交易额时一般都把备件、武器以及配套的维护和检测设备等计算在内，这一价格也说明配套引进的俄制导弹数量并不会太多。
> 
> 问题4：苏-35何时形成战斗力？
> 
> 根据俄罗斯军工综合体公布的苏-35生产厂——阿穆尔河畔共青城厂（KnAAPO）到2020年之前的生产计划，在2016年完成俄军首批48架订单中最后10架之后，将向中国空军交付首批4架（从03批的批尾开始）。而计划内容显示，最晚在2018年这24架战机就将交付完成。
> 
> 根据我军之前引进苏-27和苏-30战机的传统，确定将引进一型飞机之后，在交付列装前部队会提前至少一年派出空勤地勤人员前往俄罗斯学习新型战机的理论知识和实际操作，以缩短战斗力形成周期。也就是说早在合同正式签订前，甚至是在2014年珠海航展上首次在国内和苏-35“亲密接触”前，中国空军已经对苏-35有了深入的了解。
> 
> 考虑到这二十多年来国内对三代机乃至“三代半”战机装备系统和使用经验的“食髓知味”，加上换装苏-35的部队自身就很可能有着丰富三代机使用经验；1993年8月我军首个接装苏-27的部队（在此之前他们使用的是和苏-27有着明显代差的歼-7IIA）因换装一年后就形成初始战斗力（IOC），而以师级建制荣立集体一等功的故事或许将以更快的速度重现。
> 
> 2018年第一个苏-35单位满编并形成战斗力后，或许也将是中国空军考量是否将购买更多的苏-35的时候。24架苏-35相当于空军现行编制一个三代机团/旅的数量，而根据《华尔街日报》等外媒的报道，中方有可能在签订首批苏-35引进合同时，还与俄方就后续48架乃至96架的意向协议进行了商讨。这就引发了最后一个问题，中国会采购这么多的苏-35么？
> 
> 问题5：为什么有了歼-20还要苏-35？
> 
> 随着第四代战斗机歼-20的原型机不断试飞，以及歼-10B/C、歼-11D/16等第三代改进型战斗机的亮相服役，反对引进苏-35的声音认为，和它们相比苏-35的优势并不大，面对歼-20还处于劣势，引进苏-35无助于战斗力的提升。
> 
> 和三代机全面替换二代机不同，在空中力量使用理论产生重要变革，机载航电武器大发展的时代，三代机和四代机并非替代关系，而将配合使用很长时间，即使是目前全球唯一装备有两型四代机的美国空军也是如此。一位美国空军官员11月22日表示，因F-35交付延迟和现有三代机群老化等因素，美国空军将考虑招标采购最多72架全新的三代机。考虑的范围包括先进F-15、新型F-16甚至包括海军的F/A-18E/F，而它们的交付时间将和苏-35交付中国大致相当。
> 
> 而中国空军的情况则更为复杂。在空军仍有数百架上世纪70年代水平，已经很难适应现代战争要求的歼-7B/H的时候，仅靠成都飞机公司的歼-10和沈阳飞机公司的歼-11两大系列三代机的产能，想在歼-20服役时完成对它们的替换是很难的，届时中国空军很可能将面对二、三、四代机“三代同堂”的场面。而随着苏-35生产技术的逐步成熟，KnAAPO的生产速度也在提高，如果中国决定采购后续批次，那么到2020年的时候第二个单位的苏-35就能满编。
> 
> 当然产能因素仅仅是一个方面，前面提到的苏-35在部分技战术指标上的突出性也是引进的重要考量。例如尽管苏-35优秀的格斗机动性被认为在这个超视距空战大行其道的年代是“屠龙之技”，但发挥这一性能的关键——融合了气动舵面和推力矢量综合控制的飞控系统，可能对歼-20等型号未来的性能完善产生重大影响。
> 
> 和24年前引进划时代的苏-27时完全的惊为天人相比，今天的中国在引进苏-35时的眼光将更加客观务实。发挥其技战术指标特长提升空军转型期的战斗力，吃透其关键子系统的技术为我所用，苏-35将成为2020年之后彻底淘汰老旧二代机（除少数二代后期型之外），数量达1000架以上的三代机与四代机并存的中国空军中一块重要的装备拼图


China has yet to vector engine.Available SU35 do validation.SU35 no slows panel on the wing surface vector engine control state.


----------



## cnleio

UKBengali said:


> I still don't get the point of buying SU-35 when China is ready to deploy J-20.
> All it does is send a signal that China has no confidence in the J-20.


Can save time of building new aircraft ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Khafee

UKBengali said:


> I still don't get the point of buying SU-35 when China is ready to deploy J-20.
> All it does is send a signal that China has no confidence in the J-20.



Stop gap measure.

J-20 is still in the R& D phase. It's a new platform, will take time. Till then what do you do? Very good move by China. 

Congratulations!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Makarena

shjliu said:


> I don't think China will be "in alliance" with any other country, even with Pakistan. it is in China's policy.



Policy is made by man, not God, it can be changed. Lately, there are a lot of things that have changed in China.


----------



## Deino

I know my obsession to numbers is maybe not understandable to others, but if You look at this blurred block of numbers it does not look as if it is a 11x3x-pattern that a 6. AR, 2. Division type should have ??


----------



## Akasa

Deino said:


> I know my obsession to numbers is maybe not understandable to others, but if You look at this blurred block of numbers it does not look as if it is a 11x3x-pattern that a 6. AR, 2. Division type should have ??
> 
> View attachment 363429



Another notable feature is the Russian-style livery. Are we sure these jets are not for a DACT/aggressor regiment?


----------



## Deino

SinoSoldier said:


> Another notable feature is the Russian-style livery. Are we sure these jets are not for a DACT/aggressor regiment?


 
I'm still inclined to this theory: Explore and develop the use of TVC in aerial combat and to use this bird for DACT/ in a dedicated aggressor regiment ... as such I would have expected something in line of the 175. Brigade FTTC (with 78x6x-serials), maybe as a replacement for this unit's Su-30MKK, but these reports abaout an assignment to the 2. Fighter Division if true is indeed a surprise.

Deino


----------



## 帅的一匹

The paint job of Su35 delivered is very weird........


----------



## UKBengali

cnleio said:


> Can save time of building new aircraft ...



Not really a good excuse this one. China is not in an emergency war situation that it needs aircraft fast.

Whatever the reasons are, China has not done itself any favours by buying SU-35 as it
sends a signal that China may not have faith in it's home grown aircraft. It is bizarre to be
buying a 4th generation fighter when you are just about to induct a 5th generation one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

UKBengali said:


> Not really a good excuse this one. China is not in an emergency war situation that it needs aircraft fast.
> 
> Whatever the reasons are, China has not done itself any favours by buying SU-35 as it
> sends a signal that China may not have faith in it's home grown aircraft. It is bizarre to be
> buying a 4th generation fighter when you are just about to induct a 5th generation one.




It is really funny with what arrogance some here think they are smarter than the PLAAF's headquarter and all their military considerations. I am more than sure the PLAAF leadership have their reasons even if we don't understand or some even like it.

Seems as if a foreiner like me has more faith in the Chinese Air Forces decisions that some genious here.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## UKBengali

Deino said:


> It is really funny with what arrogance some here think they are smarter than the PLAAF's headquarter and all their military considerations. I am more than sure the PLAAF leadership have their reasons even if we don't understand or some even like it.
> 
> Seems as if a foreiner like me has more faith in the Chinese Air Forces decisions that some genious here.



Yes as if "professionals" always know more than enthusiasts!

Plenty of stupid decisions have been made in the
past to know that people paid to do something can
get it wrong from time to time.

Anyway I have made my point and so best move on.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## monitor

#*China* received first batch of four Su-35 fighter jets from #*Russia* #*PLAAF* http://www.airrecognition.com/index.php/archive-world-worldwide-news-air-force-aviation-aerospace-air-military-defence-industry/global-defense-security-news/global-news-2016/december/3188-china-received-first-batch-of-four-su-35-fighter-jets.html …






@Deino ??


----------



## lcloo

Deino said:


> I know my obsession to numbers is maybe not understandable to others, but if You look at this blurred block of numbers it does not look as if it is a 11x3x-pattern that a 6. AR, 2. Division type should have ??
> 
> View attachment 363429



The paint scheme this "PLAAF" SU-35 made me ponder, why is it so similar to that of Russian airforce? Is this a psed photo using a original photo of a Russian Airforce SU-35?

Below is a Russian Airforce SU-35.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Indeed as such a ligit question: how sure we are that this single image is not photoshopped ???
Not that I question the delivery itself, but it's first the serial that puzzles me and also the camo is too much of Russian AF style.


Deino


----------



## Beast

The Chinese don't even bother to change all manual and label onboard Su-35 to Chinese when Russian kindly proposed to Chinese asking them the need to do it. The Chinese outright reject it.


----------



## Deino

So You think the CHinese also don't bother to simply adobt the same colour scheme ?

Could indeed be the most simple explanation.

And what do You think about that blurred serial number ? IMO it looks not like a 11x3x-pattern ...


----------



## cnleio

UKBengali said:


> Not really a good excuse this one. China is not in an emergency war situation that it needs aircraft fast.
> 
> Whatever the reasons are, China has not done itself any favours by buying SU-35 as it
> sends a signal that China may not have faith in it's home grown aircraft. It is bizarre to be
> buying a 4th generation fighter when you are just about to induct a 5th generation one.


Where u see the U.S building F-22 & F-35, will abandon their F-15 and F-16 aircrafts ? Does Russia building T-50, will abandon their Su-30 & Su-27 ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UKBengali

cnleio said:


> Where u see the U.S building F-22 & F-35, will abandon their F-15 and F-16 aircrafts ? Does Russia building T-50, will abandon their Su-30 & Su-27 ?



Are they buying foreign kit?

Big difference between making domestic aircraft and
importing foreign ones.

This decision is so bizarre it defies logic. J-20
will be so much superior than SU-35 that it will
be a turkey shoot for J-20 pilots if they ever went
against each other.

Whatever the reason for this strange purchase, China
has caused untold damage to its's reputation as a 
fighter aircraft producer.


----------



## Avicenna

UKBengali said:


> Are they buying foreign kit?
> 
> Big difference between making domestic aircraft and
> importing foreign ones.
> 
> This decision is so bizarre it defies logic. J-20
> will be so much superior than SU-35 that it will
> be a turkey shoot for J-20 pilots if they ever went
> against each other.
> 
> Whatever the reason for this strange purchase, China
> has caused untold damage to its's reputation as a
> fighter aircraft producer.



I think you are being overly harsh. I am sure the PLAAF leadership has its reasons for the the SU-35 purchase.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cnleio

UKBengali said:


> Are they buying foreign kit?
> 
> Big difference between making domestic aircraft and
> importing foreign ones.
> 
> This decision is so bizarre it defies logic. J-20
> will be so much superior than SU-35 that it will
> be a turkey shoot for J-20 pilots if they ever went
> against each other.
> 
> Whatever the reason for this strange purchase, China
> has caused untold damage to its's reputation as a
> fighter aircraft producer.



LOL ... China Airforce just save the time to equip 1,000+ 3-gen & 4-gen fighters for the future challenge, not care whether those advanced fighters from China aircraft producer or Russia aircraft producer ... Su-35 is much better than Mig-29 and F-16, such purchase only make China Airforce more power. Future the relationship between U.S / Russia / China will be more interesting, above three countries try to produce & get more weapons in next years. China need Su-35, coz PLAAF need new power in the sky.

Future the sky in West Pacific is F-22 / F-35 / F-15 / F-16 *vs* J-20 / J-21(maybe) & Su-35 / Su-30 & J-16 & J-11B / J-10B/C, that's the *strategy balance between U.S and China*. The Su-35 purchase from Russia is the double insurance for China PLAAF building.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## UKBengali

cnleio said:


> LOL ... China Airforce just save the time to equip 1,000+ 3-gen & 4-gen fighters for the future challenge, not care whether those advanced fighters from China aircraft producer or Russia aircraft producer ... Su-35 is much better than Mig-29 and F-16, such purchase only make China Airforce more power. Future the relationship between U.S / Russia / China will be more interesting, above three countries try to produce & get more weapons in next years. China need Su-35, coz PLAAF need new power in the sky.
> 
> Future the sky in West Pacific is F-22 / F-35 / F-15 / F-16 *vs* J-20 / J-21(maybe) & Su-35 / Su-30 & J-16 & J-11B / J-10B/C, that's the *strategy balance between U.S and China*. The Su-35 purchase from Russia is the double insurance for China PLAAF building.
> View attachment 363497



24 planes is nothing.


----------



## Beast

UKBengali said:


> 24 planes is nothing.


The plane is not for China.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tiqiu

Deino said:


> I know my obsession to numbers is maybe not understandable to others, but if You look at this blurred block of numbers it does not look as if it is a 11x3x-pattern that a 6. AR, 2. Division type should have ??


That pattern is not always reliable, it can be changed upon needs or when compromised.
It was widely believed the first batch of 4 were delivered to the D2, not FTTC Cangzhou. Maybe it has something to do with the recent tensions with Taiwan.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cnleio

UKBengali said:


> 24 planes is nothing.


More, not only 24x.


----------



## rcrmj

cnleio said:


> More, not only 24x.


im afraid thats it, we only wanted 2 from them in the very begining```we actually done quite a lot tests on Su-35 before this hand over, and quite deep tests actually, and the brass not quite happy with few of its true stats, but in whole its a decent plane`````I can only say that

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Tiqiu said:


> That pattern is not always reliable, it can be changed upon needs or when compromised.
> It was widely believed the first batch of 4 were delivered to the D2, not FTTC Cangzhou. Maybe it has something to do with the recent tensions with Taiwan.
> ...




O.k. ,,, but as far as I know, the PLAAF is not known for faking their serials - pretending to not show, to hide or ps or remove them; YES - but not to apply faked numbers.

BY the way ... my Japanese is even worse than my Chinese  but does he say 23063~23066 ??


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/813685821706338304


----------



## Ultima Thule

Beast said:


> The plane is not for China.


then WHO's don't say that these are for Pakistan


----------



## Deino

@BoQ77 Please do us a favour ... and do not start another flame war !!!

The J-20 is in active PLAAF service - maybe only at the FTTC and not in front-line use - but anyway it is; period ... end of Your claim.
And not sure what You were smoking before You posted "China would be interested in T-50 too" 

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

BoQ77 said:


> Yeah I remember one Chinese member said that the deal is for Pakistan, not for China too.


It just @Beast thinks that

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Cyberian

What's the reason given for the earlier than scheduled delivery of the aircraft?


----------



## 帅的一匹

SUPARCO said:


> What's the reason given for the earlier than scheduled delivery of the aircraft?


I think China will buy another regiment of it if it can show a good performance in combat excercise. As to the earlier delivery, I think it's per China's requirement. The situation around China is gettin worse.



BoQ77 said:


> The Su-35 arrival opposed nearly all estimation of Chinese members few years ago.
> @Deino : could you name the more advance fighter in China for next few years that's ready for air combat?


No, please. Not again!

We have thousands 3th gen fighter need to be replaced.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

cnleio said:


> More, not only 24x.



Agree. And more AL41 engines



cnleio said:


> LOL ... China Airforce just save the time to equip 1,000+ 3-gen & 4-gen fighters for the future challenge, not care whether those advanced fighters from China aircraft producer or Russia aircraft producer ... Su-35 is much better than Mig-29 and F-16, such purchase only make China Airforce more power. Future the relationship between U.S / Russia / China will be more interesting, above three countries try to produce & get more weapons in next years. China need Su-35, coz PLAAF need new power in the sky.
> 
> Future the sky in West Pacific is F-22 / F-35 / F-15 / F-16 *vs* J-20 / J-21(maybe) & Su-35 / Su-30 & J-16 & J-11B / J-10B/C, that's the *strategy balance between U.S and China*. The Su-35 purchase from Russia is the double insurance for China PLAAF building.
> View attachment 363497



You just unable know for sure whether Su35 better than the latest F16 or not.


----------



## Deino

Deino said:


> O.k. ,,, but as far as I know, the PLAAF is not known for faking their serials - pretending to not show, to hide or ps or remove them; YES - but not to apply faked numbers.
> 
> BY the way ... my Japanese is even worse than my Chinese  but does he say 23063~23066 ??
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/813685821706338304




Back to my number-obsession:

It seems as if this guy noted that the number of the Chinese SU-35SK seems to be 23063 or 23066. And that there are reports that following the military reform, the PLA Air Force again changed their serial-number rules so that it becomes impossible to decipher by the conventional method.

Anyone with some more information ???


Even more concerning the PLAAF's acquisition of the Su-35 an interesting interview with Xu Yongling, Chief test pilot of the J-10 was posted some time ago regarding the J-20, the Su-35 and various other questions:

https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/j-20-5th-gen-fighter-thread-v.t7303/page-208#post-401562
Regrettably the video has been removed since then.



> ....
> 
> •In talking about Su-35: Su-35 purchase is to satisfy immediate needs. Tech wise China could mainly learn from its flight control, especially its "low-speed all-situation super manoeuvrability" which is the only example in the world. It also achieved this manoeuvrability without canards, something that China is unable to achieve today.
> 
> •The deal on Su-35 depends on the political situation between China/Russia/US. In addition, China is not going to buy a lot but wants to get it in a hurry, so it has very little bargaining power as a buyer. As a result of these complicating factors, whether the deal can go through is highly uncertain, it could happen next month or it could keep dragging on, or it may never go through.
> 
> ....


----------



## 52051

Like I said many times before, this deal is more about balance of trade between China and Russia.

Same reason why China want to buy the US bonds.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Oh no ... a faked image again !!!

http://www.fyjs.cn/thread-1851066-1-1.html

... even if I'm still sure that the first 4 Su-35 are in China.

Deino


----------



## BoQ77

52051 said:


> Like I said many times before, this deal is more about balance of trade between China and Russia.
> 
> Same reason why China want to buy the US bonds.



I must tell you "it's irrelevant".
Russia want to sell Su35, and China need to buy it. Deal. 

You simply dont buy a new platform for entertaining someone while you dont need it.
It is complicated enough for you to maintain those Su35 and someone is right to expect future purchase of Su35.


----------



## 52051

BoQ77 said:


> I must tell you "it's irrelevant".
> Russia want to sell Su35, and China need to buy it. Deal.
> 
> You simply dont buy a new platform for entertaining someone while you dont need it.
> It is complicated enough for you to maintain those Su35 and someone is right to expect future purchase of Su35.



Not really

China armed force dont want it thats why they let the negoation lasting for a decade or so and thats why just last year the China's team try to sabotage the deal through means of remove all agreement before and downsize the deal from 24 to 4 and ask the Russian side to significantly change many characters of Su-35 within a very short period of time to force Russian side to give up, it is the political leadership's pressure plus Russian side threat to cut supply for Al-31F engines supply make the deal remain revelant.

China armed force need Russian's Su-35 as much as they need US's worthless bonds.

If China really want something, they will sign the deal in a week and pay the cash in full, instead of wasting a decade or so talking.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

And now ??? I think I don't know what to believe anymore ...

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## cnleio

Deino said:


> And now ??? I think I don't know what to believe anymore ...
> 
> View attachment 364111


Whatever, ppl don't care whether Su-35 really in China, but care how S@CK aircraft made by China coz buy Su-35 from Russia ...  ppl just like the news what they want.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The Eagle

People can speculate against such purchase only as per personal opinion or approach either in favour or against PLAAF/Chinese Government decision but the thing is, these ACs are bought for a purpose best known to the officials and concerns which itself is a addition of greater punch against adversary. Addition is always good whether indigenous or from external source which is on purpose that most of us are not well aware of but it is not just because that China cannot produce such quality AirCrafts in house though it is on the right track. 

By reading few posts, IMO, it is not necessary that if China can produce J-20, can do for 4.5++ (Western Gen Terminology) as well in the same time so it may take some time but soon would be producing much better version in class of SU-35s as well so then it will be enough for self reliance. This particular purchase is holding something back there that many cannot see but would be proven by the passage of time only.

Congrats  for such high value, capable bird induction.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Deino

cnleio said:


> Whatever, ppl don't care whether Su-35 really in China, but care how S@CK aircraft made by China coz buy Su-35 from Russia ...  ppl just like the news what they want.




I'm not sure if You really got be right !?
I'm completely sure these birds are in China, I am even more convinced - in contrast to some other certain members, who are offended by the pure imagination that China still buys Russian systems - that the PLAAF has more than one reason to introduce this fighter ....

The only thing in fact I'm still not sure is, how real this image is??

There are IMO too many bored fan-boys out there with only one intention to fool others and even more - like I already asked above but no one answered - the serial number "23x3x" if correct does not make sense ... at least not to me since no PLAAF unit has a "3" as the second number.

So I really beg You not to throw me in the same basket of nay-Sayers, who still hope this all is a fake ... I only want to see it on my own in a clear, full-size & high resolution image or to get an explanation, why the number is off.

Thanks,
Deino



The Eagle said:


> People can speculate against such purchase only as per personal opinion or approach either in favour or against PLAAF/Chinese Government decision but the thing is, these ACs are bought for a purpose best known to the officials and concerns which itself is a addition of greater punch against adversary. Addition is always good whether indigenous or from external source which is on purpose that most of us are not well aware of but it is not just because that China cannot produce such quality AirCrafts in house though it is on the right track.
> 
> By reading few posts, IMO, it is not necessary that if China can produce J-20, can do for 4.5++ (Western Gen Terminology) as well in the same time so it may take some time but soon would be producing much better version in class of SU-35s as well so then it will be enough for self reliance. This particular purchase is holding something back there that many cannot see but would be proven by the passage of time only.
> 
> Congrats  for such high value, capable bird induction.



Exactly what I try to say since some time even if some simply think they know it better than the PLAAF-command.

Hmmm ... contra again ?!!

via "=Berkut" at http://forum.keypublishing.com/show...ese-air-power-thread-18&p=2364603#post2364603



> Eeeeeeeeeeeeeh.
> 
> 1; The camo doesnt match, so if someone faked it he certainly laid more work into it than usual by changing the camo scheme.
> 
> 2; The pylons are lacking on the "faked" picture, again same point as above.
> 
> 3; Shadows doesnt match between the supposed faked and the "source" picture.
> 
> 4; Antennas on the vertical tail.
> 
> 5; Etc etc.
> 
> Imho this is terrible and illogical "proof" of the picture being a fake. It might be a fake for all i know, but that "proof" is terrible in actually proving anything.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Eagle

Deino said:


> Exactly what I try to say since some time even if some simply think they know it better than the PLAAF-command.



IMO, such induction carries more value than any of us can think about, for PLAAF.

Lets say how about to learn more of the SU-35 structure for future engineering. How about learning the TVC and powerful Engine terminology to the further extents and above all, how about to test the TVC against J-20 and vice versa (You know what I mean) for better tactics beside these SU-35s are going to serve the country as Sky-Guards as well and soon, we may see a capable Chinese Bird competing such class. It's a win win.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Deino

Exactly !


----------



## Asoka

Deino said:


> And now ??? I think I don't know what to believe anymore ...
> 
> View attachment 364111



Russian color with Chinese insignia. Photoshop!!!


----------



## CAPRICORN-88

*PLA news portal: Su-35 intended to be last type of imported fighter*
People Daily Online December 30, 2016

Four Russian Su-35 fighter jets were delivered to China on Dec. 25, ending speculations about the procurement of the aircraft, which had been delayed about two years, according to an article on 81.cn, a news portal of the People’s Liberation Army.

Since the debut of the J-20 fighter at Zhuhai Airshow, procurement of the Su-35 fighter jets has gone quite smoothly. Some say this is the outcome of the close relationship between China and Russia. However, the latter did not change its stance on the exportation of the Su-35 until the J-20 fighter was unveiled. *Russia believes that with the commissioning of the J-20, the Su-35 will soon lose its value in the Chinese market. That estimation is the reason for the smooth procurement.*

Today, the construction of China's first independently developed aircraft carrier is in full swing, and the first carrier battle group has already begun training.

The article offered an old Chinese proverb: "One can only be independent when he is self-reliant.” The article further expressed hope that the Su-35 fighter jet is the last fighter imported by China.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

I want a clear image of a Chinese Su-35 !!!!! Come on PLAESE !!!!! 

Any way






__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/816298733734338560


----------



## juj06750

russia is very ridiculous . It wants to sell such rubbish for a decade, leaving its state media that china wants it . actually china don't even need it lol

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

Whether S35 is worth of buying, we will see the result after it field against J20 in the combat Excercise.


----------



## Deino

wanglaokan said:


> Whether S35 is worth of buying, we will see the result after it field against J20 in the combat Excercise.




Why do some here always measure the Su-35 against the J-20 ? There are hundreds of other fourth-generation types around in all potential conflicts and until the F-35 will appear in larger numbers they will be fine enough. And if, then the J-20 will do its job.

So I really don't understand this upset within some Chinese circles. It is affine fourth-plus generation fighter, that immediately brigs additional capabilities to the PLAAF and experience is always good.

So why all this upset ?

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

Deino said:


> Why do some here always measure the Su-35 against the J-20 ? There are hundreds of other fourth-generation types around in all potential conflicts and until the F-35 will appear in larger numbers they will be fine enough. And if, then the J-20 will do its job.
> 
> So I really don't understand this upset within some Chinese circles. It is affine fourth-plus generation fighter, that immediately brigs additional capabilities to the PLAAF and experience is always good.
> 
> So why all this upset ?
> 
> Deino


Bro, it's not about upset. It's about the value Su35 can contribute dealing with Stealthy fighters. If it works, we will buy more. If it performs pathetic, we will turn the page. Chinese are realistic people, they don't want to spendmoney to no avail. I'm ok with

Su35 is a monster in WVR, we will see how it perform in BVR.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

wanglaokan said:


> Bro, it's not about upset. It's about the value Su35 can contribute dealing with Stealthy fighters. If it works, we will buy more. If it performs pathetic, we will turn the page. Chinese are realistic people, they don't want to spendmoney to no avail. I'm ok with
> 
> Su35 is a monster in WVR, we will see how it perform in BVR.




Completely agreed, but the main issue is - as You explained "Stealthy fighters" - but at least currently there are not so many of them out there and for those few the J-20 will be the toy of choice. Consequently for all what is currently available there right now and for a long, long time a Su-35 is a perfect fighter against any potential adversary.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Khafee

Deino said:


> Completely agreed, but the main issue is - as You explained "Stealthy fighters" - but at least currently there are not so many of them out there and for those few the J-20 will be the toy of choice. Consequently for all what is currently available there right now and for a long, long time a Su-35 is a perfect fighter against any potential adversary.


How does SU-35 fair on the EW side?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Sorry ... I have no info !

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

Khafee said:


> How does SU-35 fair on the EW side?


Its a mysterious fighter until now.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Naif al Hilali

Khafee said:


> How does SU-35 fair on the EW side?


currently has:

_N035 Irbis-E PESA (Passive Electronically Scanned Array) Radar, a follow-on to the Bars-M
Rear-looking self-defense radar in shorter tail sting
L175M Khibiny-M electronic-warfare self-defense system
OLS-35 optoelectronic targeting system that provides laser ranging, TV, infra-red search and track (IRST) functionality
Reduced radar cross-section (RCS) though still slightly large by 4++ generation standards_

The OLS-35's air-to-air employability and the excellent radar warning receivers can keep it silent for a while but they have limited range and the airframe and radar themselves are noisy. The PESA radar is a generation behind your Block 60's AESAs. 

There have been reports for a while of the Zhuk-AE AESA being slotted for integration; initial reports suggested it is not as advanced developmentally and technologically as the current Israeli/Chinese versions let alone US/European AESAs. The Low Probability of Interception [LPI] modes should help, though we know nothing about its effectiveness in assisting the onboard jammers.

The Khibiny ECM system itself is large and certainly powerful. Sophistication was supposed to be behind French and American systems but recent re-appraisals of Russian ECM capability leave that question open. The Russian reports of the April 2014 disabling of the AEGIS radar system of the USS Donald Cook by an SU-24 equipped with this system have not yet been commented on by the Americans, I believe.

Russians are good in propulsion (a little behind the Americans and French now), Surface-Launched Missiles, and Analog ECM. They are catching up on the digital side of things now.

The best ECM (in sophistication) currently is supposed to be the Rafale's Spectra, SAAB Gripen-E's well-integrated systems, and the US AIDEWS (and ALR) systems.

The Russians are great with their equations though and their systems always have huge power, so it is better to be wary of them, although I would be even more concerned about their new generations of ground radars and ECM equipment. Thankfully their woeful economic situation precludes them from deploying enough of all these (except the SAMs which they have plenty of and of which even the older versions are still very potent). Also, they won't give the good electronic stuff to anybody ever (including India now).

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## juj06750

it seems that russian media gives another bullshit 


_Taiwan's union newspaper quoted the Russian media as saying that it took action on the AL-41F1S engine of all fighters Russia sold to China. According to *the Russian media*, Yevgeny Bozynski, chairman of the Russian Policy Research Center (PIR), who is from the military, said that he did not give high technology to China in the absence of any action.

"If we touch the key areas where China has touched it, the whole engine will be damaged to the point where it can not be used," he said. He added, "The Su-35 exported to China is not the same as the one for the Russian Air Force, and we have our own version for export and export."

"The two sides have signed an agreement to protect intellectual property rights," the Russian Far East Khabarovsk State Komsomolskornamurese city with a manufacturing plant Su-35 said, "The fighter will never be replicated without approval." However, it is known that most of the Russian experts have a negative stance on whether China will faithfully implement the agreement.

In November 2015, Russia signed a $ 2 billion ($ 83 million) contract to export 24 Su-35 fighters to China. That same month, the Chinese Ministry of National Defense confirmed the contract. Russia plans to deliver the remaining 20s to China by 2018._


russian says it worries china's copy of its engine
remember, it was russia that want to sell the rubbish to china for a decade
china don't even need them all 
it seems that russia wants to keep its pride as it leaving false message to its state media

Ridiculous RUSSIA !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ptldM3

juj06750 said:


> it seems that russian media gives another bullshit
> 
> 
> _Taiwan's union newspaper quoted the Russian media as saying that it took action on the AL-41F1S engine of all fighters Russia sold to China. According to *the Russian media*, Yevgeny Bozynski, chairman of the Russian Policy Research Center (PIR), who is from the military, said that he did not give high technology to China in the absence of any action.
> 
> "If we touch the key areas where China has touched it, the whole engine will be damaged to the point where it can not be used," he said. He added, "The Su-35 exported to China is not the same as the one for the Russian Air Force, and we have our own version for export and export."
> 
> "The two sides have signed an agreement to protect intellectual property rights," the Russian Far East Khabarovsk State Komsomolskornamurese city with a manufacturing plant Su-35 said, "The fighter will never be replicated without approval." However, it is known that most of the Russian experts have a negative stance on whether China will faithfully implement the agreement.
> 
> In November 2015, Russia signed a $ 2 billion ($ 83 million) contract to export 24 Su-35 fighters to China. That same month, the Chinese Ministry of National Defense confirmed the contract. Russia plans to deliver the remaining 20s to China by 2018._
> 
> 
> russian says it worries china's copy of its engine
> remember, it was russia that want to sell the rubbish to china for a decade
> china don't even need them all
> it seems that russia wants to keep its pride as it leaving false message to its state media
> 
> Ridiculous RUSSIA !!!





Someone seems frustrated, no one is forcing China to buy Russian "rubbish". The two most rediculus excuses I hear on this forum is that China only buys Russian enegines to offset some kind of trade imbalance...pretty stupid excuse, the other excuse is that China only buys Russian engines because it can't fulfill the orders demesically....another lame excuse considering China produced thousands of engines in the past.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## juj06750

_The People's Liberation Army's website, 81.cn, recently said that with the commissioning of the J-20, China's domestically developed stealth fighter, Russia understood that the Su-35 "will lose its value on the Chinese market in the near future", so was eager to complete the Su-35 deal. The Su-35 is Russia's most advanced fighter jet in use.

The article also takes pride in the PLA no longer needing *Russian-made air defense missiles or transport planes* because it now has the indigenous, cutting-edge HQ-9B long-range surface-to-air missile and Y-20 strategic transport aircraft._



it seems that china officially rejected russia's another eager proposals to buy its S400 SAM and IL76 planes instead of receiving the useless four su35s . I hope that china returns those su35s back to russia soon . and please would china say "now you (russia) no longer need to worry about copyrights of your engine"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

China and Russia military trading had been on a halt since early 2000. Su35 is the last platform we will induct from Russia. We will continue to induct Russian engines.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

China daily and PLA 81.cn confirmed this deal and they confirmed deliveries of the Su-35, though they did not elaborate.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2017-01/06/content_27877527.htm



> New technology may put an end to such imports in the future
> 
> The Chinese military has confirmed that it received four Russian-made Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets in late December, but noted that the Su-35 might be the last combat plane China would import thanks to its own defense advances.
> 
> The People's Liberation Army's website, 81.cn, recently said that with the commissioning of the J-20, China's domestically developed stealth fighter, Russia understood that the Su-35 "will lose its value on the Chinese market in the near future", so was eager to complete the Su-35 deal. The Su-35 is Russia's most advanced fighter jet in use.
> 
> The article also takes pride in the PLA no longer needing Russian-made air defense missiles or transport planes because it now has the indigenous, cutting-edge HQ-9B long-range surface-to-air missile and Y-20 strategic transport aircraft.
> 
> *"Therefore we hope very much that Su-35 will be the last (combat) aircraft China imports," it said.*
> 
> This is the first time the Chinese military has confirmed deliveries of the Su-35, though it did not elaborate.
> 
> In late December, some Chinese military enthusiasts posted a photograph of what they said was a Su-35 with the PLA Air Force's colors flying over a military air base in China, sparking a debate on whether deliveries of the aircraft had begun.
> 
> Sergey Chemezov, CEO of Rostec, Russia's state technology corporation, said in November 2015 that Russia and China had signed a contract that was estimated to be worth $2 billion for 24 Su-35s. The deal was later confirmed by Wu Qian, a spokesman for China's Defense Ministry.
> 
> Russian news agency TASS quoted an unnamed source within Russia's international military-technical cooperation system as reporting in mid-December that the first deliveries of the aircraft were scheduled in 2017, but "eventually a decision was made to speed up the process and to provide the first batch in the last days" of 2016.
> 
> The Su-35 has engines that can point in different directions for increased maneuverability, and phased array antenna radar, which provides better performance against stealth aircraft. It has a maximum speed of 2,500 km/h and can fly 3,400 km without refueling, according to TASS. The fighter is armed with a 30 mm gun and can carry 12 bombs or missiles, the report said.
> 
> China bought a large number of Su-27 and Su-30 multirole fighter jets from Russia in the 1990s and early 2000s. China also has built licensed variants. These Sukhoi planes are a pillar of the PLA Air Force and the PLA Navy's aviation wing.
> 
> Wang Ya'nan, editor-in-chief of Aerospace Knowledge, told China Daily that the Su-35 will help the PLA fill the gap before it has enough J-20s. He said the new addition will also facilitate China's efforts to upgrade its current Sukhoi jets.


----------



## Deino

Only another fake !?? ... but anyway a nice one


----------



## grey boy 2



Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Deino

grey boy 2 said:


>




*Thank You so much !!!*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Avicenna

What a beauty!


----------



## Deino

Any info on it's serial-number ???


----------



## Erl

I thought China is developing 5th gen fighters. Does China really need those beautiful birds? Or just a political issue?!


----------



## Deino

Just found:



> ...
> They were rumored to enter the service with PLAAF *18th Division* facing the South China Sea. The heavy fighter might provide long-range escort for the *H-6K* cruise missile carrier patrolling over the West Pacific and over the South China Sea.
> ...



http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.de/p/fighters-ii.html#Su-35

I thought they were rumoured to be based at Suixi and assigned to the 2. Division ?

Deino


----------



## Sanchez

I believe PLAAF needs Su-35 for multiple purposes. First they will evaluate how good it’s performance is，and second，use them as a trainer for J-11B pilots to mimic the Su-30MXX existing in our neighbors.


----------



## Deino

PS:

... and Mike Yeo notes, the weibo poster says they were taken from 山海黄浦 (Shanghai Huangpu ) area.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/826310281634553856


----------



## Brainsucker

grey boy 2 said:


>



I can't see any different between AL41 and AL31 from this picture. They said that AL41 is a 3D TVC. So how can we see the difference?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

That image simply too blurred and as long as the TVC nozzle is not tilted they quite more or less the same.


----------



## The Eagle

*Russia to deliver ten Su-35 fighter jets to China in 2017*
Published time: 2 Feb, 2017 14:20Edited time: 2 Feb, 2017 14:42
Get short URL




Su-35 fighter. © Artem Zhitenev / Sputnik
READ MORE: China buys 24 advanced Russian Su-35 warplanes in estimated $2bn landmark deal

The contract for 24 Su-35s was inked in November 2015, making China the first international buyer of the advanced Russian warplane. The three-year deal for the aircraft, ground equipment, and spare engines is valued at $2 billion.

The Su-35 is a long-range '4++ generation' super-maneuverable fighter jet. It is armed with an internal 30mm cannon and has 12 hardpoints with a combined capacity of 8,000 kg, compatible with a wide range of unguided and guided missiles and bombs. Its maximum speed is 2,500 km/h, with a range of 3,400 km, and a combat radius of around 1,600 km.

Beijing first showed an interest in buying Su-35s in 2008 during the Airshow China international expo. Formal negotiations started in 2011.

China is currently among the world’s top five buyers of Russian arms, restoring its position after a slowdown in the late 2000s.

*READ MORE: Russia-China military ties ‘at all-time high,’ no threat to other states*

The country buys advanced Russian jet engines, submarines, and surface-to-air missiles, among other high-tech military items.

According to the Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu, cooperation between the two countries _“is at an all-time high” and “continues to steadily expand each year,”_ particularly in the economic sphere.

Trade between China and Russia was about $68 billion in 2015. Projects for the *next three years are estimated at $200 billion.*

In November, Russia announced the delivery of the S-400 missile systems to China by 2020, making it the first country authorized to buy the advanced air defense weapon. The deal is reportedly worth $3 billion.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WarFariX

<Russia’s cutting-edge Su-35 fighters arrive at Karelia base (VIDEO) dec 2016 >






The second batch of 10 Russian Sukhoi Su-35 multipurpose fighter jets will be delivered to China this year with a further 10 aircraft in 2018, TASS reported on Thursday, citing its sources.
_"The first four planes were supplied late last year and the second batch of 10 jets will be delivered to the customer this year,"_ said an unnamed source familiar with the matter.

In November, Deputy Director of the Federal Service for Military and Technical Cooperation Vladimir Drozhzhov told TASS that Moscow had started deliveries of the fighter jets to China.

The contract for 24 Su-35s was inked in November 2015, making China the first international buyer of the advanced Russian warplane. The three-year deal for the aircraft, ground equipment, and spare engines is valued at $2 billion.



The Su-35 is a long-range '4++ generation' super-maneuverable fighter jet. It is armed with an internal 30mm cannon and has 12 hardpoints with a combined capacity of 8,000 kg, compatible with a wide range of unguided and guided missiles and bombs. Its maximum speed is 2,500 km/h, with a range of 3,400 km, and a combat radius of around 1,600 km.

check out more on www.facebook.com/strategical.journal

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WarFariX

HariPrasad said:


> :


low life troll... from 2nd most ignorant nation in the world... knowing and ignoring facts is what most of u do....
China has interests in SU35 for some reasons as well as deal was to boost ties with Russia... nonetheless every jet in Chinese inventory is poison on IAF... stay jealous.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Ultima Thule

MarvellousThunder@PDC said:


> low life troll...2nd most ignorant nation in the world...knowing and ignoring facts is what most of u do....china has interests in su35 for some reasons as well as deal was to boost ties with russia...nonetheless every jet in chinese inventory is poison on IAF..stay jealoused


Hit the report button sir

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Akasa

HariPrasad said:


> :



The Su-35 isn't meant to fill a technological gap; the J-11D, J-16, J-15A, and 5th generation fighters would all eventually replace the Su-35 as air-superiority and multirole aircraft. China would've purchased far more than 24 airframes had the Su-35 really excelled Chinese Flankers in terms of sophistication.


----------



## Akasa

HariPrasad said:


> Chinese Flanker????!!!!!
> 
> You really amuse me. You copied J15 from Su 33 and we know very very well how it compares with its Russian counterpart. You have bought Su 35 for copying like earlier version and we know very well how its quality is.



Why don't you actually explain why you think the Su-35 would supersede Chinese Flankers on a technical basis? Are you aware that the Su-35s are being inducted at a time when the J-16 and J-11D are about to hit mass production?


----------



## cnleio

HariPrasad said:


> Chinese Flanker????!!!!!
> 
> You really amuse me. You copied J15 from Su 33 and we know very very well how it compares with its Russian counterpart. You have bought Su 35 for copying like earlier version and we know very well how its quality is.


U know @ss about Flanker ... or Indian Airforce won't buy any new foreign fighters. Trust me after China equip Su-35 no doubt ur India will beg Russian to offer the same Su-35 to India Airforce, Im 100% sure future India will buy Su-35 too. LOL !!!

We all knew China domestic heavey fighters developed from Russia Flanker(Su-27,Su-30), after learning Flanker Chinese already can build them with domestic jet engines & AESA & Avionics system & Weapons & WING/FUSELAGE structure, China can build what we want and build as many as we need. Most PLAAF fighters come from domestic aircraft manufacturers and numbers of new fighters still increasing, we r not the student yet, we already built domestic fighter building system.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Akasa

HariPrasad said:


> :



Your so-called "scientist" (an analyst) acknowledges that the J-15 features critical upgrades over the Su-33 (including but not restricted to a lighter airframe, AESA radar, avionics & electronics refurbishments, and newer engines) and was simply describing limitations of a *STOBAR* aircraft, not necessarily the J-15 itself.

None of what you've wrote demonstrates that the Su-35 is allegedly supposed to satisfy an alleged gap in technology (which is quite amusing given China's extensive lead over Russia in the field of military avionics among its Flankers), _especially_ when the J-11D, J-16, and J-15A are being produced or tested at full pace.


----------



## Akasa

HariPrasad said:


> My opinion does not matter here. What matter here is you buy a fourth generation plane inspite of the claim that you have 2 fifth generation planes. This in itself tells a lot. Keep hyping. I quite discussion.



So by your same logic, the fact that the United States keeps producing F-18s implies that their F-22s and F-35s are somehow inferior? 

Keep in mind that only 24 Su-35s were purchased (after the Russians denied the Chinese to retrofit them with Chinese avionics & subsystems) at a time when the comparable J-11D/16 were in their late stages of flight testing or LRIP.


----------



## cnleio

HariPrasad said:


> As usual you started your post in typical chinese way. You are a think tank. You should try to be better than others.
> Whether we shall buy or not that time will tell. We do not buy saying that our plane is better than Russian and still buy it. We say Russians' are better that is why we buy it.


LOL ... when u said "You(China) copied J15 from Su 33", im sure u know nothing, still post fake news here. In this world u can not find any news about Russian provide Su-33 to China for copying, and Chinese didn't get any Su-33 from Russia in hands to research.

The J-15 prototype is from Ukraine's T-10K-3, the one is early prototype of Su-33 in USSR time. So Chinese not get Russia Su-33, but indeed get help from Ukraine. Today PLAN J-15 is developed from T-10K-3 + J-11B.







The difference between China & India aircraft development, Chinese always find out the way to learn aircraft building techs even from third country, we never complain.

Back to the Su-35 topic, once Russian selling Su-35 to China, they never mind China copy it ... or Russian not sell Flanker to China, they know Chinese have the capacity to research Su-35.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Deino

*Guys ... don't feed the trolls !* 


And now back to topic....


----------



## Deino

What do You think of this idea ??


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/827833113569005568


----------



## 帅的一匹

SinoSoldier said:


> The Su-35 isn't meant to fill a technological gap; the J-11D, J-16, J-15A, and 5th generation fighters would all eventually replace the Su-35 as air-superiority and multirole aircraft. China would've purchased far more than 24 airframes had the Su-35 really excelled Chinese Flankers in terms of sophistication.


We only want 4 Su35, Russian insist on 48. Then the final number is 24.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Brainsucker

wanglaokan said:


> We only want 4 Su35, Russian insist on 48. Then the final number is 24.



It can be like that too. PLAAF need an aggressor jet fighter that can imitated the capability of SU-30 MKI and F-22 (that both have 3D TVC engine)


----------



## j20blackdragon

Deino said:


> What do You think of this idea ??
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/827833113569005568
> View attachment 374351



The first number is clearly a 2.

Also the color scheme doesn't match any PLAAF/PLANAF planes.

I'm guessing aggressor squadron.



j20blackdragon said:


> Also the color scheme doesn't match any PLAAF/PLANAF planes.



_*Recent images (September 2012) indicated at least 5 Su-30MKKs (S/N 20x9x) are wearing a new "tropical" camouflage (pink, yellow and green) similar to Vietnamese Su-30MKV. These are believed to serve as "blue force"/aggressors for dissimilar air combat training.*_

http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.com/p/attack-aircraft.html






*A Su-30MKK operated by a PLAAF opposing force (OPFOR) unit in special desert camouflage colour*

https://sinodefence.com/2014/02/15/pla-flanker-fighter-family/

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## j20blackdragon

Moreover, the idea that the "2" is actually a "7" is wrong. I can prove it.



> Anyway, the most suspect issue however – and I admit; I’m addicted to PLAAF serial numbers – is that the two so far best Su-35 photos all seem to begin with a “2xxxx”, which was already from day one my biggest concern since it simply does not fit to the 2nd Division serial. Even kore these images so far seem not only begin with a "2" but also a "23xxx", which is even more unusual, since no PLAAF serial number has a “2” or “3” as second digit.
> 
> Now Huitong (http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.de/p/whats-new.ht…) suggested, that the first “2” could also be a “7”, which would led to a serial number of with "73xxx" would indeed make sense, it would be a Brigade assigned to the Nanning Base, also Southern Theatre Command !
> 
> Even more – and here I probably need some help from You – I would go so far to assume this “could” be a “73x8x” serial block, which would correspond to the 127th Brigade. And since the Nanning Base – all Bases usually have four assigned Brigades – is still lacking its fourth Brigade, this would even more fit.



Look at the difference between how the "2" and "7" are painted on other Flankers.














Now look at your own picture.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Thanks ... like I said, it's a theory to be taken with a lot of salt and even if I agree with You that the serial most likely starts with "23xxx", if these images are manipulated at least a bit, a 7 is not out of possible.
Just remember these most recent images showing the PLN KJ-500 and KQ-200 with psed serials.

Anyway, Thanks.
Deino


----------



## j20blackdragon

2nd Fighter Division is 1xx3x.

18th Fighter Division is 2xx9x.

Nanning Base is 73xxx.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## grey boy 2



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

j20blackdragon said:


> 2nd Fighter Division is 1xx3x.
> 
> 18th Fighter Division is 2xx9x.
> 
> Nanning Base is 73xxx.




Exactly ... so if one puts one and one together, it seems indeed as if the 18. Division would be a logical assignment: This unit already uses a type used for dissimilar and adversary training - therefore the unique camo - and the serial number "2xx9x" would also fit nicely !

Only the "3" as second digit - if correct - does not make sense.

Thanks.



grey boy 2 said:


>




Any more info on WHEN in 2017 ??


----------



## cnleio




----------



## Deino

cnleio said:


> View attachment 374657




Thanks and quite interesting since it also has "23xxx" even if the "23x6x" - meaning 15th Ground Attack Division IMO does not make sense !


----------



## j20blackdragon

I would focus on divisions with serial number 2xxxx.

I would focus on divisions with experience operating Russian Flankers with Russian avionics. I'm talking about pilots with experience with Su-27SK, Su-27UBK, Su-30MKK.

The 'blue camo' color scheme is a major clue. That is not a standard PLAAF color. Aggressor squadron is highly likely.

18th Division would be my guess.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Thanks !


----------



## j20blackdragon

Note the similarities. China is prepping for Vietnam.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## cnleio

j20blackdragon said:


> Note the similarities. China is prepping for Vietnam.
> 
> View attachment 374842


Interesting ... Su-35 play as 'enemy force'


----------



## 帅的一匹

cnleio said:


> Interesting ... Su-35 play as 'enemy force'


That's the only one/two purpose we buy it.

Actually China is no more interested in Russian fighter, cause we are not satisfied with their weapon system any more.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Maybe 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/828607212503257088


----------



## j20blackdragon

cnleio said:


> Interesting ... Su-35 play as 'enemy force'



Look at the colors used for USAF aggressors.





PLAAF is emulating these colors closely.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

Deino said:


> Maybe
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/828607212503257088



I would say YES !
I find esp. the edge of the vertical tail's trailing edge quite characteristically. On the Su-35 it is vertical, even a bit leaning backward, while in a Su-27SK/J-11A it is leaning forward.


----------



## ptldM3

wanglaokan said:


> That's the only one/two purpose we buy it.
> 
> Actually China is no more interested in Russian fighter, cause we are not satisfied with their weapon system any more.





No one will spend 83+ million for a single SU-35s if they are not "satisfied" nor would anyone in their right mind pay that much for an aircraft that will only be used as aggressor aircraft when they can just use SU-30s or any J-11 variant for that role.


That Vitnamese SU-30 is painted in a basic Russian camo, so is the SU-35. The SU-35 obviously impressed the Chinese Air Force, claiming anything otherwise or trying to discredit the SU-35 is just nationalist pride.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## j20blackdragon

PLAAF planes have a very specific color scheme. Off-color planes are not the norm.

All off-color Flankers operated by 18th Division (serials 2xx9x) are aggressor aircraft. Evidence can be easily provided.
http://china-defense.blogspot.com/2012/09/desert-camo-for-china-air-forces-su-30s.html

huitong's blog confirms Su-35 entered service with 18th Division. We can also visually confirm that the Su-35 serials are indeed 2xxxx. I agree the numbers are blurry.
http://chinese-military-aviation.blogspot.com/p/fighters-ii.html#Su-35

It's also interesting to note that the Su-35 was not sent to FTTC (serials 78xxx). The best PLAAF pilots are sent there to conduct flight testing of new aircraft and equipment, developing new techniques and tactics for new planes. FTTC is tasked with developing new combat tactics, flight techniques, training programs for new aircraft and conducting certification of new equipment.

All the high priority planes are sent to FTTC first.

For example, J-10B. Note the 78xxx serials.





All four of the J-20s were sent to FTTC first. Note the 78xxx serials.

















We currently have zero evidence that they even bothered to send Su-35 to FTTC.

But you guys can believe whatever you want to believe.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

j20blackdragon said:


> ....
> We currently have zero evidence that they even bothered to send Su-35 to FTTC.
> 
> But you guys can believe whatever you want to believe.




Agreed, but who is still pretending that the Su-35 are assigned to the FTTC ?? ... even if I have to admit it was my first bet.


----------



## j20blackdragon

Almost forgot.

J-10C with AESA is another high priority plane. Also sent to FTTC first.





So if you guys want to convince us that Su-35 is a high priority plane in the PLAAF, show us the 78xxx serial.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sanchez

I am not sure that all the18th division pilots fly aggressor jets. One of their regiments stations at the airport close to my city and there are only regular Su-30MKKs flying around. I haven’t been able to see Su-35 yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Sanchez said:


> I am not sure that all the18th division pilots fly aggressor jets. One of their regiments stations at the airport close to my city and there are only regular Su-30MKKs flying around. I haven’t been able to see Su-35 yet.




Good point ... so what units within the 18. Division could be ?

52nd Air Regiment - Wuhan-Shanpo - J-7B
53rd Air Regiment - Changsha / City - Su-30MKK
54th Air Regiment - Wudangshan - J-7B, JJ-7A

Probably both J-7B-units are prime candidates for a replacement ??


----------



## Sanchez

54th is the Su-30MKK regiment
53th is the regiment at Wudangshan training base with JJ-7.

Don't know the recent changes with planes but the 54th MKK are with 20x9x


----------



## Deino

Sanchez said:


> 54th is the Su-30MKK regiment
> 53th is the regiment at Wudangshan training base with JJ-7.
> 
> Don't know the recent changes with planes but the 54th MKK are with 20x9x




Hmmm  ... but 54th Regiment would mean *21x9x (01-50) *serials and at least at GE there are the J-7Bs at Wudangshan.


----------



## j20blackdragon

One of the most important functions of the FTTC is to establish a certain level of interoperability within the PLAAF. That is the reason why so many different planes go to FTTC first. J-10B, J-10C, and J-20 are all expected to work together during a war. The FTTC's job is to create the necessary tactics/techniques/training that would allow them to do so. Su-35 didn't even go to FTTC. How do you expect Su-35 to work with any other plane?



Deino said:


> Good point ... so what units within the 18. Division could be ?
> 
> 52nd Air Regiment - Wuhan-Shanpo - J-7B
> 53rd Air Regiment - Changsha / City - Su-30MKK
> 54th Air Regiment - Wudangshan - J-7B, JJ-7A
> 
> Probably both J-7B-units are prime candidates for a replacement ??



The elite divisions within the PLAAF are usually the first to be rewarded with new planes, and they usually will have at least one J-10 regiment along with one Flanker regiment. 18th Division has two J-7 regiments, which means they never received a J-10 upgrade all these years. The Su-30MKKs were delivered in 2003. That means they received their newest planes 14 years ago. Pilots have experience with third-gen and foreign Russian aircraft with little (or perhaps none) interoperability between planes. Pilots are probably old guys flying old planes. The only notable characteristic about 18th Division is that they run an aggressor program.

Su-35 skipped over the FTTC and went straight over to the unremarkable 18th Division. They didn't even bother to blur the serial numbers to hide this fact. What does that tell you?

Think about it like this. If the Su-35 actually went to an elite regiment, they would blur the serial numbers to hide the location of this regiment. Why do you guys think we have so few pictures of J-16 with yellow serial numbers? Because they don't want you to know the locations of the elite regiments receiving this aircraft.


----------



## Sanchez

@Deino *21x9x *serials belong to the 53th regiment that was a training unit previously under Guangzhou military region air force command.

@j20blackdragon At least two of the four Su-35 were flown to the 2th division stationed in Zanjiang，GD， with serial numbers of 11X3X.

You guys could visit the official page of China‘s DoD http://eng.chinamil.com.cn/，check out photo reports of Feb 5.


----------



## Deino

Sanchez said:


> @Deino *21x9x *serials belong to the 53th regiment that was a training unit previously under Guangzhou military region air force command.



Hmmm ... but - sorry if I'm wrong - then could You please explain why the 53rd and 54th Regiment do not follow the typical PLAAF-serial numbering system: Within each Division - for example the 18th Division - the serials are all within the range of 2xx8x, for the first Regiment (here the 52nd) the xxx numbers are 001 to maximum x49, for the second Regiment (here the 53rd) the xxx numbers are 050 to maximum x99 and for the third Regiment (here the 54th) the xxx numbers are 101 to maximum 150.

Consequently the Su-30MKKs with xxx = 0xx serials are from the 53rd Regiment; Or how can You explain this off-sequence numbers ?




> @j20blackdragon At least two of the four Su-35 were flown to the 2th division stationed in Zanjiang，GD， with serial numbers of 11X3X.
> 
> You guys could visit the official page of China‘s DoD http://eng.chinamil.com.cn/，check out photo reports of Feb 2.




Concerning this, the link (even if broken) does indeed show several 2nd Division Flankers (Su-27SK/J-11A and Su-27UBK) but not a single Su-35, at least not clearly showing their serials. Or am I wrong ?

Thanks for that discussion and I'm eager to learn more ..

Deino


----------



## Sanchez

@Deino I can only confirm that 20x9x is the 54th stationed at Changsha（http://www.fyjs.cn/thread-865526-1-1.html?_dsign=5558561a）and 11x3x the 6th regiment stationed at Suixi （Su-27s http://lt.cjdby.net/thread-722136-1-1.html）. The 53th regiment （http://lt.cjdby.net/thread-1353578-1-1.html）

Among the photos published on the official webpage there’s an opague image that many fans considered as the new Su-35. From the last October people have been talking the Su-35s will go to the 2nd div that has Su-27s right now. On Dec 25 last year eye witnesses wrote in a forum that he saw two Su-35s arrived at Suixi. There‘s no confirmation yet.

As to the Su-35 with Russian camo and opague “21xxx” numbers they are certainly not in the 54th regiment！

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Sanchez said:


> @Deino I can only confirm that 20x9x is the 54th stationed at Changsha（http://www.fyjs.cn/thread-865526-1-1.html?_dsign=5558561a）and 11x3x the 6th regiment stationed at Suixi （Su-27s http://lt.cjdby.net/thread-722136-1-1.html）. The 53th regiment （http://lt.cjdby.net/thread-1353578-1-1.html）
> 
> Among the photos published on the official webpage there’s an opague image that many fans considered as the new Su-35. From the last October people have been talking the Su-35s will go to the 2nd div that has Su-27s right now. On Dec 25 last year eye witnesses wrote in a forum that he saw two Su-35s arrived at Suixi. There‘s no confirmation yet.



Thanks a lot and please don't me wrong; my questions are not meant as critics; I only wonder why this number-plate swap between 53rd & 54th AR within the 18th Division?

My concern is only that these numbers show the aircraft only and not the Regimental numbers ... So I fully agree with You that the MKK in 20x9x-serials are at Changsha, but may I ask where You know the Regimental number from ... and would a Regimental number-swap not result also in a renumbering ?




> As to the Su-35 with Russian camo and opague “21xxx” numbers they are certainly not in the 54th regiment！



That's for sure ... but as far as I know this blurred image is showing a Su-30MKK and a "maybe" Su-35 in the background, which itself would hint to the 18th Division. Not sure if these images showing Flankers from the 2nd Division were from the same base.

Thanks again,
Deino


----------



## j20blackdragon

huitong personally confirms on sinodefence that Su-35 went to 18th Division. Deino liked the post.
https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/chinese-purchase-of-su-35.t5915/page-242






Like I said before, Su-35 skipped over the FTTC (best pilots/personnel in PLAAF) and instead was relegated to the unremarkable 18th Division, which just so happens to be one of the few divisions that run an aggressor program. The 'blue camo' color scheme of the Su-35 is further evidence.

Aggressor squadrons use enemy tactics, techniques, and procedures to give a realistic simulation of a real adversary. 18th Division is well suited to simulate Vietnam. 18th Division pilots have experience with obsolete J-7B and Su-30MKK, perfect for the simulation of Vietnamese MiG-21 and Su-30MK2V.


----------



## Deino

j20blackdragon said:


> huitong personally confirms on sinodefence that Su-35 went to 18th Division. Deino liked the post.
> https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/chinese-purchase-of-su-35.t5915/page-242
> View attachment 375602
> 
> 
> Like I said before, Su-35 skipped over the FTTC (best pilots/personnel in PLAAF) and instead was relegated to the unremarkable 18th Division, which just so happens to be one of the few divisions that run an aggressor program. The 'blue camo' color scheme of the Su-35 is further evidence.
> 
> Aggressor squadrons use enemy tactics, techniques, and procedures to give a realistic simulation of a real adversary. 18th Division is well suited to simulate Vietnam. 18th Division pilots have experience with obsolete J-7B and Su-30MKK, perfect for the simulation of Vietnamese MiG-21 and Su-30MK2V.




Yes ... but first of all even if Huitong is IMO a remarkable source of information, he's not free of faults (just look at the WS-15 he posted too), as such I beg to wait until we call it confirmed.

I agree with You - and as such with him too - that by now most points hint to the 18th Division, but honestly I do not understand why You need to remind that often that the 18th Division is "unremarkable".

Anyway ... can't wait for finally a very clear image showing the full serial numbers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## j20blackdragon

Deino said:


> I would say YES !
> I find esp. the edge of the vertical tail's trailing edge quite characteristically. On the Su-35 it is vertical, even a bit leaning backward, while in a Su-27SK/J-11A it is leaning forward.
> 
> View attachment 375102

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Sanchez

Deino said:


> What do You think of this idea ??
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/827833113569005568
> View attachment 374351



This type of Chinese Su-35 camo is PSed as the person who made it admitted. It came out originally on the his Chinese Weibo.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Sanchez said:


> This type of Chinese Su-35 camo is PSed as the person who made it admitted. It came out originally on the his Chinese Weibo.



Sorry, but do You mean this image You quoted ? This was made by me in an attempt to make the serial numbers more visible!
Or do You mean the other two, but that would mean all two "clearer" images are PSed ??

Deino


----------



## Sanchez

I meant the “original” ones, the Russian camo with PLAAF serials in yellow.


----------



## Deino

Sanchez said:


> I meant the “original” ones, the Russian camo with PLAAF serials in yellow.



But as far as I know it was proven that they were real !! 

Even more since this would mean all three must be PSed what again is unlikely. Did he show the original Russian images and did he explain how he made them ?






If that is true what You say, so we are back again at point Zero ?

Deino


----------



## Sanchez

Deino said:


> But as far as I know it was proven that they were real !!
> 
> Even more since this would mean all three must be PSed what again is unlikely. Did he show the original Russian images and did he explain how he made them ?
> 
> View attachment 376531
> 
> 
> If that is true what You say, so we are back again at point Zero ?
> 
> Deino



It‘s from a web runner，www.meyet.com. Yes，we definitely know nothing about where these birds are.


----------



## Deino

Now already 2 ... and I can't think that they are all PSed !

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

Finally a clear image Chinese Su-35 showing serial no. 23063 ... I'm confused since indeed the 2xx6x would be 15th Division but the no. 3 simply does not fit !! 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/833426427366240256

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 帅的一匹

ptldM3 said:


> No one will spend 83+ million for a single SU-35s if they are not "satisfied" nor would anyone in their right mind pay that much for an aircraft that will only be used as aggressor aircraft when they can just use SU-30s or any J-11 variant for that role.
> 
> 
> That Vitnamese SU-30 is painted in a basic Russian camo, so is the SU-35. The SU-35 obviously impressed the Chinese Air Force, claiming anything otherwise or trying to discredit the SU-35 is just nationalist pride.
> 
> View attachment 375107


I wouldn't be surprise if China order two more squadrons of Su35. We need hell amount of good fighters in shorter time period. You know Yankees won't leave us alone. China and Russia is making deals to ensure mutual maximum benefits. We need your industrial production capacity. We can shoulder partially the pressure you suffered from the Nato, that's building up muscle in SCS. Right now Donald Trump is drifting away from Russia, although he is forced to do so. Do you think KGB has video of Trump held bunga bunga party in the hotel when he visited Moscow last time? I can say president Putin is a genius and the most excellent KGB officer in the history. China need Russia, vice versa. Su35 is a beauty, I enjoy it. At the same time your government sell 117s engine to Indian MKI, that's little bit concerned. Do you think India is a handy leverage to contain China sir?



Deino said:


> Finally a clear image Chinese Su-35 showing serial no. 23063 ... I'm confused since indeed the 2xx6x would be 15th Division but the no. 3 simply does not fit !!
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/833426427366240256
> View attachment 378533


Said the RCS of Su35 is only 3 SQM, is it true?


----------



## The Eagle

Mineichi1940 said:


> YES，it's Joke!
> 
> 
> 25 years time from Bought SU-27 from Russia ,
> to prove the fact that: China can not produce reliable fighters so far
> 
> 
> Chinese people always think that they are "God's voters"
> They despise the Indians everywhere and everytime



Avoid derailing of topic by quoting 7 years old posts. 

Thanks,

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The Eagle

Mineichi1940 said:


> Chinese people tear up Su-27's purchase contract and steal Russian technology,Produced J-11A/B、J-15、J-16 without permission.
> From 1993 to now on.
> They thought they knew everything.
> 
> But today They also continue to buy Sukhoi aircrafts.
> Such as Su-35sk、Su-30MKK、Su-30MK2
> They also continue to buy Saturn engines Perm engines and Klimov engines.
> ---AL-31F used to J10、J11、J15、J16、J20
> RD-33 used to FC-1、FC-31
> D-30 usd to Y-20、H-6




Russians are aware in-case of such or anything and are still a friendly and supportive nation towards China hence, these remarks wouldn't change the fact at all. Russian are still selling weaponry to China and both countries are enjoying the best relations w.r.t. defence cooperation and production/selling. 

I have already tagged in a thread and suggested you to go through the rules of the forum as well. 

Mere blaming and such accusations may lead to ban from the topic/section/Forum so it is advised that avoid posting of flame-baiting/off-topic/derailing/provocative remarks and try to contribute to the topic with productivity and information even if you want to rebut any post. 

We can also agree to disagree with each other and can move on without being offensive.

Quoting 7 years old posts wouldn't make any difference that you replied while reading the first page on this thread but should also go through the whole thread and see that the subject is already discussed in light of above old quoted posts. No more off-topic/provocative and flame-baiting posts.

Regards,

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## cnleio

Mineichi1940 said:


> Chinese people tear up Su-27's purchase contract and steal Russian technology,Produced J-11A/B、J-15、J-16 without permission.
> From 1993 to now on.
> They thought they knew everything.
> 
> But today They also continue to buy Sukhoi aircrafts.
> Such as Su-35sk、Su-30MKK、Su-30MK2
> They also continue to buy Saturn engines Perm engines and Klimov engines.
> ---AL-31F used to J10、J11、J15、J16、J20
> RD-33 used to FC-1、FC-31
> D-30 usd to Y-20、H-6


Yes, some words r right here ... China indeed bought many jet engines & aircrafts from Russia since 1990s ... but Russian still willing to provide new fighter & jet engines to China, they don't mind it, they still want arms deal with Chinese for both win-win situation. If U.S can export F-35 & F-22 to us, i don't doubt we like to buy some too. On the other hand, as we see China not stop design & produce domestic aircrafts and continue WS-10 jet engine development, i think both r making PLAAF stronger, that's good for China Airforce.

India, Japan, Korea which one not importing foreign fighters & jet engines from U.S/Russia and also developing domestic aircrafts ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

*@Mineichi1940 

To admit I don't like the tone of Your posts. First of all it is a Su-35-thread and You are now all up to prove that China still cannot build reliable engines. As proof You are using old information, You are mixing engine types that are not related to each other and even more tend to generalise ...

As such I don't know what You want: If You want to contribute to the topic it's fine, but then argue ... if You want to troll and spoil that thread then take this as a warning.*

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## yantong1980

Please just banned trolls and delete their useless comment and continue this valuable conversation.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

CGs made by the master himself !

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## monitor

Elephant walk

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

monitor said:


> Elephant walk




Nice shot, but these are Su-30MKK and not Su-35 ???!!!


----------



## Deino

Even if the serial numbers are wrong ...

High res scans of the new Kitty Hawk's instruction sheet are up on HobbySearch.
http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10454358

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Reportedly Chinese Su-35 on their way to China... real or faked?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SQ8

Deino said:


> Reportedly Chinese Su-35 on their way to China... real or faked?
> 
> View attachment 407346
> View attachment 407347


Regarding elite or non elite units- no unit is kept elite for long. Experienced pilots are transferred out , a mix of rookies and experience made and a general level of balance maintained.

A unit is not elite, its pilots are and those are transferred out when air staff commanders decide

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

> First 4 or 5 Su-35s of 2nd batch delivered to China on 28 June.




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/881022104732225536

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

and now OedoSoldier:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/881049803114790912

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## grey boy 2

Deino said:


> and now OedoSoldier:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/881049803114790912


Its been all over the Chinese internet in the last few days, everybody is busying about the 055 including me, thats why its been ignore

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Deino

grey boy 2 said:


> Its been all over the Chinese internet in the last few days, everybody is busying about the 055 including me, thats why its been ignore




Indeed and the 055 is even more a reason to ignore the Su-35, anyway for me as an Air Force guy it's a bit more interesting especially if by now there are any more information about their assignment, base and serial numbers known?


----------



## lmjiao

Deino said:


> Indeed and the 055 is even more a reason to ignore the Su-35, anyway for me as an Air Force guy it's a bit more interesting especially if by now there are any more information about their assignment, base and serial numbers known?


No, still busy celebrating 055 and EMALS.


----------



## Deino

Kitty Hawk has updated ist FB-site with 20 new Images of a Su-35 in PLAAF-colours:





__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1518363294882618


----------



## Deino

For me the post of the month !!

Since it finally confirms them assigned to the 6. Brigade (aka former 6. AR, 2. Division) with the correct numbers applied. As I assumed, the so far seen numbers were only applied for the transfer from Russia.

Deino

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> For me the post of the month !!
> 
> Since it finally confirms them assigned to the 6. Brigade (aka former 6. AR, 2. Division) with the correct numbers applied. As I assumed, the so far seen numbers were only applied for the transfer from Russia.
> 
> Deino
> 
> 
> View attachment 428222
> View attachment 428223


Shouldn’t the post of the month be the WS-10X on 2021? IMO, that was the post of the last couple years ...


----------



## Deino

At least a bit ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JSCh

From weibo,


----------



## Deino

JSCh said:


> From weibo,
> View attachment 435910




Nice ... but these are standard J-11A !!!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## JSCh

Weibo report new batch of 5 delivered to China.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Indeed, ... dafengcao also reports that already 14 were delivered


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/936444486695010305

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## CoffeeByte

Which engine on Chinese Su-35s?


----------



## Deino

Those, which usually power the Su-35: the Saturn AL-41F1S - aka 117S - with TVC.


----------



## Deino

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/940940024584970240

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## JSCh



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## first77

How many SU-35s does China have ??


----------



## JSCh

*China sends Su-35 fighter jets for South China Sea patrol*
Source: Xinhua| 2018-02-07 20:08:28|Editor: Mengjie




BEIJING, Feb. 7 (Xinhua) -- China has recently sent Su-35 fighter jets for a joint combat patrol mission in the South China Sea area, according to the People's Liberation Army(PLA) air force Wednesday.

The deployment is part of the air force's efforts to carry out military training under combat conditions, it said.

The Su-35 fighter jets participating in such training are expected to enhance the air force's combat capability under long-distance or high-sea conditions, it said.

The PLA air force said it would continue to attach importance to science and technology, rule of law and sound planning in its training to improve its ability to win wars in the new era.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Deino

Yes ... 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/961171654037487616 

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/961199545437876225

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/961235368346554368

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## lcloo

There is a rumour that PLAAF may have already signed a new contract for another 24 SU-35SK. No official confirmation yet.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

lcloo said:


> There is a rumour that PLAAF may have already signed a new contract for another 24 SU-35SK. No official confirmation yet.




To admit that report is based most of all on this one...

http://www.atimes.com/article/russian-su-35-fighters-rumored-join-plaaf/

and - maybe I'm too much biased - but right after reading "Hong Kong-based military monthly Kanwa Defense Review" I immediately stopped further reading.

Reactions: Like Like:

3


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> To admit that report is based most of all on this one...
> 
> http://www.atimes.com/article/russian-su-35-fighters-rumored-join-plaaf/
> 
> and - maybe I'm too much biased - but right after reading "Hong Kong-based military monthly Kanwa Defense Review" I immediately stopped further reading.


The article speaks of local production and assembly in China ... which is all but impossible after the J-11 incident. Moreover, what kind of "technology transfers" would the PLAAF benefit from exactly??? Too many holes in the article ... purchasing more Su-35s would make it much harder for the PLAAF to integrate them given that they are Russian flanker, not Chinese ones


----------



## Deino

Forget it ... IMO pure Kanwa-BS.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LKJ86

https://lt.cjdby.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=2466601&extra=page=1
Some guy said they were the models of Su-35.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## HAIDER

Max The Boss said:


> China to get Su-35 fighter jets
> 
> The Su-35 is a super maneuverable fighter jet, copied from the Su-30 prototype. The Su-35 fighter jet is similar with the F-18 Super Hornet.
> 
> The Su-35 is still in development by the Russian company Sukhoi and is determined for the Russian Air Force. It's an air-defense and ground-attack jet, which should be operating under all weather conditions. However Russia still hasn't given an order. Sukhoi works with the money from what China has paid for the Su-35 fighter jet.
> 
> Technical Material
> 
> In contrast with the Su-27 the Su-35 has protect material made from carbon-fiber with an alloy of aluminum and lithium. The nozzles in the 2 engines have been replaced by titanium. Maximum speed is around 2.4 mach without bombs or missiles.
> 
> Radar and electronics
> 
> The Su-35 has radar which can at the same time observe the air and ground threats. This radar, digital phased array radar can more like: do ground surveillance, searching and select enemies in the sky, and warning to avoid determined fields. The Su-35 has also a satellite control navigation system. With a fly-by-wire system it has a high level of maneuverability. With ECM (Electronic Counter Measures) pods mounted on the wings the Su-35 can do electronic warfare.
> 
> Weapons
> 
> The Su-35 has 12 standards which can be expanded to 14 points to carry air-to-air and air-to-surface missiles.
> 
> 
> This Information (Rumor) spreading with some Asian Defense Analysts.
> 
> Looks like China will replace Su-27 with Su-35.
> 
> Any one knows more Information about China getting Su-35 fighter jet?


But, Russia hasn t sold TVC tech or engines to China yet.


----------



## IblinI

HAIDER said:


> But, Russia hasn t sold TVC tech or engines to China yet.







WS-10 with TVC.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## LKJ86

https://m.weibo.cn/1617093763/4231294982959973

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HAIDER

Deino said:


> View attachment 468787


what is engine status ? ... Pakistan won't get J10 until engine issue resolved.


----------



## Deino

HAIDER said:


> what is engine status ? ... Pakistan won't get J10 until engine issue resolved.




Pardon, but I don't understand the question, since the Su-35 - also in PLAAF service - are powered by the 117S engine, an engine completely irrelevant to the J-10 and even less the PAF!?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HAIDER

Deino said:


> Pardon, but I don't understand the question, since the Su-35 - also in PLAAF service - are powered by the 117S engine, an engine completely irrelevant to the J-10 and even less the PAF!?


Talking about Chinese engine for J10 . Still Chinese ac using Russian engine. All WS series in testing phase.


----------



## Deino

HAIDER said:


> Talking about Chinese engine for J10 . Still Chinese ac using Russian engine. All WS series in testing phase.



Ok ... but since you posted this in the Su-35 thread.

Concerning the J-10 & WS-10 I'm still not sure and I must admit these latest tests surprise me; and I would have instead expected the regular J-10C + WS-10 more likely.

Concerning PAF & J-10 - and please don't get me wrong - I sometimes have the feeling that to confirm the Yeti or Bigfoot is more likely than the PAF will - due to unknown reasons for me - introduce this type.

Sorry.


----------



## Pakistani Aircraft

HAIDER said:


> what is engine status ? ... Pakistan won't get J10 until engine issue resolved.



Pakistan is not getting the J-10. What made you think PAF will purchase this platform?

J-10 is not superior to PAF's F-16s.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Pakistani Aircraft said:


> Pakistan is not getting the J-10. What made you think PAF will purchase this platform?
> 
> J-10 is not superior to PAF's F-16s.


J-10C is far more superior than PAF's F-16 @Pakistani Aircraft

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Pakistani Aircraft said:


> Pakistan is not getting the J-10. What made you think PAF will purchase this platform?
> 
> J-10 is not superior to PAF's F-16s.


The J-10C and F-16V roughly the same level ... the reason China has been thus far unable to export the J-10 is because of its Russian engine. Also, Pakistan has little need for this medium range and expensive multi-role aircraft.



Deino said:


> Ok ... but since you posted this in the Su-35 thread.
> 
> Concerning the J-10 & WS-10 I'm still not sure and I must admit these latest tests surprise me; and I would have instead expected the regular J-10C + WS-10 more likely.
> 
> Concerning PAF & J-10 - and please don't get me wrong - I sometimes have the feeling that to confirm the Yeti or Bigfoot is more likely than the PAF will - due to unknown reasons for me - introduce this type.
> 
> Sorry.


If I recall correctly, that 2014 interview with a AVIC 606 exhibitor said that since China has a large stockpile of Russian AL-31s, it is in no hurry to install the WS-10 in J-10's. The TVC shows the engine is nearing maturity ...

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## 帅的一匹

Figaro said:


> The J-10C and F-16V roughly the same level ... the reason China has been thus far unable to export the J-10 is because of its Russian engine. Also, Pakistan has little need for this medium range and expensive multi-role aircraft.
> 
> 
> If I recall correctly, that 2014 interview with a AVIC 606 exhibitor said that since China has a large stockpile of Russian AL-31s, it is in no hurry to install the WS-10 in J-10's. The TVC shows the engine is nearing maturity ...


It's just a matter of time. WS10 is mass produced, and We are waiting for the Moutian Everest.


----------



## Beast

HAIDER said:


> Talking about Chinese engine for J10 . Still Chinese ac using Russian engine. All WS series in testing phase.


Remember the J-16?


----------



## 帅的一匹

Beast said:


> Remember the J-16?


He can google it, no need further explain.



Pakistani Aircraft said:


> Pakistan is not getting the J-10. What made you think PAF will purchase this platform?
> 
> J-10 is not superior to PAF's F-16s.


Who said?



pakistanipower said:


> J-10C is far more superior than PAF's F-16 @Pakistani Aircraft


Those F16 blk52 are no match for J10c at all.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Pakistani Aircraft

wanglaokan said:


> Who said?



Pakistan Air Force.


----------



## Ultima Thule

Pakistani Aircraft said:


> Pakistan Air Force.


but its for J-10A not for J-10B/C and upcomming J-10D @Pakistan First


----------



## 帅的一匹

Pakistani Aircraft said:


> Pakistan Air Force.


The problem is that PAF's F16 is forbidden by USA to participate any exercise with China.
That's a string attached.


----------



## Beast

Pakistani Aircraft said:


> Pakistan Air Force.


You too ignorant. PLAAF top pilot Lei Qiang say F-16 is inferior to J-10. Pakistan let him pilot the PAF F-16. When he went back to China and become the test pilot of J-10. He realised J-10 is superior in all aspect compare to F-16. Pakistan has no pilot fully pilot the J-10 before. They only sit inside the secondary seat of J-10S when ferry by Chinese pilot and never fully understand J-10 capabilities. How can Pakistan make a correct assessment?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## samsara

Beast said:


> You too ignorant. PLAAF top pilot Lei Qiang say F-16 is inferior to J-10. Pakistan let him pilot the PAF F-16. When he went back to China and become the test pilot of J-10. He realised J-10 is superior in all aspect compare to F-16. Pakistan has no pilot fully pilot the J-10 before. They only sit inside the secondary seat of J-10S when ferry by Chinese pilot and never fully understand J-10 capabilities. How can Pakistan make a correct assessment?


Watch also this documentary released by CCTV, furnished with English subtitles.

*Chinese Scientists Recall History of Epoch Making J-10 Fighter Jet*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Pakistani Aircraft

Beast said:


> You too ignorant. PLAAF top pilot Lei Qiang say F-16 is inferior to J-10. Pakistan let him pilot the PAF F-16. When he went back to China and become the test pilot of J-10. He realised J-10 is superior in all aspect compare to F-16. Pakistan has no pilot fully pilot the J-10 before. They only sit inside the secondary seat of J-10S when ferry by Chinese pilot and never fully understand J-10 capabilities. How can Pakistan make a correct assessment?



No offence my Chinese friend, but if Pakistan were to buy the J-10A, J-10B or J-10C, it'll be purely out of desperation, not because Pakistan wants to buy any of these 3 variants.


----------



## Beast

Pakistani Aircraft said:


> No offence my Chinese friend, but if Pakistan were to buy the J-10A, J-10B or J-10C, it'll be purely out of desperation, not because Pakistan wants to buy any of these 3 variants.


Hi, I am just simply present a fact. J-10 with canard design is definitely a class above compare to F-16 conventional tri empennage design. Canard design is simply to handle high speed ,high atttitude maneuvers, which is something F-16 lacking. There is a reason why Euro Typhoon, Rafale , Gripen , J-10 which is classify under 4.5th fighter goes for canard layout.

We do know F-16 has outstanding low speed maneuvers but will suffer when going high speed, high attitude. Which the area where more advance BVRAAM and WVRAAM pose a massive threat. When J-10 is designed. It is designed in mind to counter ROCAF F-16 with ease.

Just becos PAF decide not to buy J-10 will not determined whether its inferior to F-16. There are lots of factor that PAF not to go for J-10, cost ,maintenance and redundant of same class of fighter in the inventory. What PAF urgently needed is a heavy weight long range fighter like Su-27 or F-15 to give PAF another dimension area of warfare. JF-17 already fulfil the need of J-10. JF-17 is definitely inferior to J-10 but it is cheap to procure and easy to maintain. It fits the bill of PAF for large procurement with a limited budgets.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

Pakistani Aircraft said:


> No offence my Chinese friend, but if Pakistan were to buy the J-10A, J-10B or J-10C, it'll be purely out of desperation, not because Pakistan wants to buy any of these 3 variants.


Sounds unsubstantiated. What makes you believe that the J-10, especially the latest variants, is inferior to its 4th generation competitors? Now, I also doubt the PAF will buy J-10s ... but not for the reasons you mentioned. 



Beast said:


> Hi, I am just simply present a fact. J-10 with canard design is definitely a class above compare to F-16 conventional tri empennage design. Canard design is simply to handle high speed ,high atttitude maneuvers, which is something F-16 lacking. There is a reason why Euro Typhoon, Rafale , Gripen , J-10 which is classify under 4.5th fighter goes for canard layout.
> 
> We do know F-16 has outstanding low speed maneuvers but will suffer when going high speed, high attitude. Which the area where more advance BVRAAM and WVRAAM pose a massive threat. When J-10 is designed. It is designed in mind to counter ROCAF F-16 with ease.
> 
> Just becos PAF decide not to buy J-10 will not determined whether its inferior to F-16. There are lots of factor that PAF not to go for J-10, cost ,maintenance and redundant of same class of fighter in the inventory. What PAF urgently needed is a heavy weight long range fighter like Su-27 or F-15 to give PAF another dimension area of warfare. JF-17 already fulfil the need of J-10. JF-17 is definitely inferior to J-10 but it is cheap to procure and easy to maintain. It fits the bill of PAF for large procurement with a limited budgets.


The PAF won't buy the J-10 simply because it does not fit their combat doctrine or any of their operational needs. Simple. Nothing to do with technology ... I'm not sure if AVIC is even advertising the J-10 anymore.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

Pakistani Aircraft said:


> No offence my Chinese friend, but if Pakistan were to buy the J-10A, J-10B or J-10C, it'll be purely out of desperation, not because Pakistan wants to buy any of these 3 variants.


Main problem with the engine AL-31F which is unavailable to Pakistan and some of its EW, ECCM/ECM is not a standard for J-10A, J-10B,C and upcoming D model uses technologies from J-20 @Pakistani Aircraft

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

pakistanipower said:


> Main problem with the engine AL-31F which is unavailable to Pakistan and some of its EW, ECCM/ECM is not a standard for J-10A, J-10B,C and upcoming D model uses technologies from J-20 @Pakistani Aircraft


Why would you think engine is a problem? RD-93 is also claim to be a problem export to Pakistan for JF-17. Guess what.... You have to understand, the backer is China. Engines are not a problem for any J-10 export.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ultima Thule

Beast said:


> Why would you think engine is a problem? RD-93 is also claim to be a problem export to Pakistan for JF-17. Guess what.... You have to understand, the backer is China. Engines are not a problem for any J-10 export.


i think india get involved to fell through a deal and other reasons got my head that Russian want AL-31F to Pakistan because USA influence in Pakistan may be i am wrong sir @Beast  you idea/guess why we don't purchase J-10 sir @Beast


----------



## 帅的一匹

Beast said:


> Why would you think engine is a problem? RD-93 is also claim to be a problem export to Pakistan for JF-17. Guess what.... You have to understand, the backer is China. Engines are not a problem for any J-10 export.


Russia will supply Al31 if J10 is exported, it's business.


----------



## Figaro

Beast said:


> Why would you think engine is a problem? RD-93 is also claim to be a problem export to Pakistan for JF-17. Guess what.... You have to understand, the backer is China. Engines are not a problem for any J-10 export.


Engines are kind a problem here. It complicates exports as China does not have full control of the supply chain ... I'm pretty sure the JF-17 RD-93 engine deal is not ideal.



Beast said:


> Why would you think engine is a problem? RD-93 is also claim to be a problem export to Pakistan for JF-17. Guess what.... You have to understand, the backer is China. Engines are not a problem for any J-10 export.


They actually are. Unless China can begin mass installation of WS-10s on the J-10, I don't see good export prospects. I'm certain that China is not satisfied with Russia being part of the engine supply chain for the JF-17 ... which is why they're working to improve the WS-13 for JF-17 Block III. Adding an entire foreign supplier really complicates the situation ... especially if it is an export contract. China doesn't have a problem with putting Russian engines into domestic use, but for a high end 4th generation fighter export, that would be extremely awkward. I'm sure the engine issue is one of the reasons why the J-10 has not been exported yet ...


----------



## 帅的一匹

Pakistani Aircraft said:


> No offence my Chinese friend, but if Pakistan were to buy the J-10A, J-10B or J-10C, it'll be purely out of desperation, not because Pakistan wants to buy any of these 3 variants.


 don't comment on something you don't know, J10c is better than the Blk52.

J10c got AESA with 320KM detection range, and PL15 with 200KM plus range. How can BLK52 field against it?



Figaro said:


> Engines are kind a problem here. It complicates exports as China does not have full control of the supply chain ... I'm pretty sure the JF-17 RD-93 engine deal is not ideal.
> 
> 
> They actually are. Unless China can begin mass installation of WS-10s on the J-10, I don't see good export prospects. I'm certain that China is not satisfied with Russia being part of the engine supply chain for the JF-17 ... which is why they're working to improve the WS-13 for JF-17 Block III. Adding an entire foreign supplier really complicates the situation ... especially if it is an export contract. China doesn't have a problem with putting Russian engines into domestic use, but for a high end 4th generation fighter export, that would be extremely awkward. I'm sure the engine issue is one of the reasons why the J-10 has not been exported yet ...


1 squadron of J10b will be delivered to BAF no later than the end of this year. J10c's export approval clearance is not signed yet.

J10c is for air-superior while Blk52 is for air-ground. The logic is weird that: what I have are the best, what I don't go for must be inferior. The world is much larger than you thought, open your eyes.

IAF doesn't give a eye on BLk70 USA offer, it means something.


----------



## 帅的一匹

Battle proven or not, Shaq O'neal is Shaq O'neal.



Figaro said:


> How does this even relate to the domestic engine handicap on the J-10? It's a simple fact that the J-10's usage of a Russian engine is hampering its export appeal ...


So what? ws10b is ready to fill the hole

As to WS13, it's a backup plan for RD93. It doesn't matter at the first beginning.

RD93 is an important bridge connect Pakistan and Russia, you think they will cut it?


----------



## 帅的一匹

Try to think out of the box. It not just military, politic matters. The only man has vision for military is Gen Mushraff.



Figaro said:


> Of course they would. If China has a suitable alternative to the RD-93 (matured WS-13), you can bet the first thing CAC would do is to cut the RD-93 supply chain. Do you really think that the JF-17 uses RD-93s because it is an "important bridge connect Pakistan and Russia"???


JF17 is a programme run mainly by Pakistan, it's never the focus of PLAAF.

Its the only reason why they stick to a smoky engine, and their willingness to go for RD93MA.

What if some countries don't have good relationship with Russia, and they wanna buy JF17? WS13 will come into play if Russia cut the supplies. What if India and Pakistan has a war and India ask Russia to stay neutral? Shit happens, prepare for the worst is nothing wrong.

It's not about good or bad, it's about how you gonna deal with it when others cut your supplies when needed.

With 5000 profound history, we think problem in a very complicated ways and aways prepare for the worst.



Figaro said:


> Engines are kind a problem here. It complicates exports as China does not have full control of the supply chain ... I'm pretty sure the JF-17 RD-93 engine deal is not ideal.
> 
> 
> They actually are. Unless China can begin mass installation of WS-10s on the J-10, I don't see good export prospects. I'm certain that China is not satisfied with Russia being part of the engine supply chain for the JF-17 ... which is why they're working to improve the WS-13 for JF-17 Block III. Adding an entire foreign supplier really complicates the situation ... especially if it is an export contract. China doesn't have a problem with putting Russian engines into domestic use, but for a high end 4th generation fighter export, that would be extremely awkward. I'm sure the engine issue is one of the reasons why the J-10 has not been exported yet ...


What you mean mass production? They already produced over 200 units of WS10 annually since last year. And if the second assembly in Shanxi is ready, they will make it 400 a year. We induct 100 fighter jets annually for PLAAF, that's nearly consume all the production of WS10 engine, not to mention the replacement for old engines.

China still has thousand old jet like F7 to replace, I don't mind we place another 48 orders for Su35 as Sukhoi is not that busy.

We desperately need new fighter jets, make it 200 a year.

And shall fully mobilize the production capacity in Russia.



Figaro said:


> Sounds unsubstantiated. What makes you believe that the J-10, especially the latest variants, is inferior to its 4th generation competitors? Now, I also doubt the PAF will buy J-10s ... but not for the reasons you mentioned.
> 
> 
> The PAF won't buy the J-10 simply because it does not fit their combat doctrine or any of their operational needs. Simple. Nothing to do with technology ... I'm not sure if AVIC is even advertising the J-10 anymore.


PAF is not buying anything new due to two reasons:
1. Limited budget
2. India is too stupid

Anyway, they are chasing the Su35. A good news.


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

video:http://video.weibo.com/show?fid=1034:d6befc1e15a3d8530e1ebe0a149b8383

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## LKJ86

http://video.weibo.com/show?fid=1034:43a95c94e35c086f27f9cb743c82f7df


----------



## LKJ86

https://m.weibo.cn/1240246333/4238582413663589


----------



## LKJ86

https://m.weibo.cn/1617093763/4238615175704206

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 帅的一匹

Should have inducted the production line of Su35.

Maybe there will be following orders for Su35.

I won't feel surprised if another 48 units ordered,customized version.

I think we shall spend some of the trade surplus, it's won't be good if all the money deposited in bank.


----------



## Beast

wanglaokan said:


> Should have inducted the production line of Su35.
> 
> Maybe there will be following orders for Su35.
> 
> I won't feel surprised if another 48 units ordered,customized version.
> 
> I think we shall spend some of the trade surplus, it's won't be good if all the money deposited in bank.


Lol... J-16 is better spend. Although more expensive than J-20 but still better than Su-35

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

Beast said:


> Lol... J-16 is better spend. Although more expensive than J-20 but still better than Su-35


Air-superior Su35 is a better choice. J16 is good to run SEAD and maritime operation.


----------



## Beast

wanglaokan said:


> Air-superior Su35 is a better choice. J16 is good to run SEAD and maritime operation.


Su-35 is nothing , just bought to balance trade with Russian. They maybe sold to PAF in later stages. J-16 with more superior radar will launch BVRAAM first than Su-35 against enemy.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 帅的一匹

Beast said:


> Su-35 is nothing , just bought to balance trade with Russian. They maybe sold to PAF in later stages. J-16 with more superior radar will launch BVRAAM first than Su-35 against enemy.


Don't be arrogant, PLAAF is no idiot.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

wanglaokan said:


> Don't be arrogant, PLAAF is no idiot.


You are ignorant and have inferiority complex. China don’t need people like you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

Although J20 is much superior, can PLAAF bear the risk of deploying J20 at SCS right now?
J20 is a ultimate weapon we can only deploy it in real war.



Beast said:


> You are ignorant and have inferiority complex. China don’t need people like you.


You are idiot, period


----------



## Beast

wanglaokan said:


> Although J20 is much superior, can PLAAF bear the risk of deploying J20 at SCS right now?
> J20 is a ultimate weapon we can only deploy it in real war.
> 
> 
> You are idiot, period


J-16 with PL-15 LVRAAM will be a nightmare for USAF.


----------



## 帅的一匹

Although J20 is superior, you don't have to belittle Su35.



Beast said:


> J-16 with PL-15 LVRAAM will be a nightmare for USAF.


J16 is very good, but it's not air-superior in WVR.护航都是短兵相接的. Let's agree to disagree. I'm a pragmatist.



Beast said:


> Su-35 is nothing , just bought to balance trade with Russian. They maybe sold to PAF in later stages. J-16 with more superior radar will launch BVRAAM first than Su-35 against enemy.


China bought Su35 to serve patrol operation, not to balance the trade surplus with Russia. PLAAF never buy anything useless.

Don't twist the facts.

Pilots engage with Su35 in WVR will get mental stress. That's a real threat and psychological deterrence.

Japanese pilots recognized they felt very stressed when confront the J11series and Su30MKK.

In the current patrol around Taiwan, PLAAF deployed Su35 directly flying to the patrol area, and deployed J10 to escort KJ2000 AWACS to the patrol area to team up with Su35. That's clear division of work.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

wanglaokan said:


> Although J20 is superior, you don't have to belittle Su35.
> 
> 
> J16 is very good, but it's not air-superior in WVR.护航都是短兵相接的. Let's agree to disagree. I'm a pragmatist.
> 
> 
> China bought Su35 to serve patrol operation, not to balance the trade surplus with Russia. PLAAF never buy anything useless.
> 
> Don't twist the facts.
> 
> Pilots engage with Su35 in WVR will get mental stress. That's a real threat and psychological deterrence.
> 
> Japanese pilots recognized they felt very stressed when confront the J11series and Su30MKK.
> 
> In the current patrol around Taiwan, PLAAF deployed Su35 directly flying to the patrol area, and deployed J10 to escort KJ2000 AWACS to the patrol area to team up with Su35. That's clear division of work.


J-16 is definitely can be used as air superior in WVR, don’t be naive and think it can’t. You think it’s JH-7A?
It just like saying Su-30MKK cant be used as Air superior too.

If Su-35 is so good, why China buy the minimal number of 24 require to be exported? Why not 96? You are delusion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

Beast said:


> J-16 is definitely can be used as air superior in WVR, don’t be naive and think it can’t. You think it’s JH-7A?
> It just like saying Su-30MKK cant be used as Air superior too.
> 
> If Su-35 is so good, why China buy the minimal number of 24 require to be exported? Why not 96? You are delusion.


J16 can be used in WVR, but it's not good as Su35. Per BVR, J16 is better or at least on par with Su35. J16D Chinese Grwoler is a monster.

You still remember EA-18G shot down F22 in excercise?

It's very delightful to see something like EA-18G in PLAAF and PLAN.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

wanglaokan said:


> Should have inducted the production line of Su35.
> 
> Maybe there will be following orders for Su35.
> 
> I won't feel surprised if another 48 units ordered,customized version.
> 
> I think we shall spend some of the trade surplus, it's won't be good if all the money deposited in bank.


I disagree. First, the Russians would never consent to another license agreement, especially after the J-11 fiasco. Even then, I highly doubt the Chinese would do so as they would be an embarrassment of their aviation industry as many observers will undoubtedly question domestic aircraft. Moreover, why in the world would China order more Su-35s or induct a production line if they can just speed up J-20 production??? A production line would be a nightmare in terms of logistics and the Su-35 would have a highly difficult time integrating with the PLAAF. Why would China need Su-35s if they already have J-20s? The reason for the purchase was to make up for the delay in the J-11D program and the need for an immediate air superiority operations, particularly in the SCS. Another 48 orders would be completely illogical, especially given the state of the J-20 and the J-16. In actual combat, I am pretty concerned about the inter-connectivity of the Su-35 with other PLAAF fighters. 



Beast said:


> J-16 is definitely can be used as air superior in WVR, don’t be naive and think it can’t. You think it’s JH-7A?
> It just like saying Su-30MKK cant be used as Air superior too.
> 
> If Su-35 is so good, why China buy the minimal number of 24 require to be exported? Why not 96? You are delusion.


Indeed. Especially since the Chinese tried so hard to reduce the 48 initially required by the Russians to only 24. I think the PLAAF really wanted to test the J-20's WVR and BVR capabilities against the a very capable warplane ...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

Figaro said:


> I disagree. First, the Russians would never consent to another license agreement, especially after the J-11 fiasco. Even then, I highly doubt the Chinese would do so as they would be an embarrassment of their aviation industry as many observers will undoubtedly question domestic aircraft. Moreover, why in the world would China order more Su-35s or induct a production line if they can just speed up J-20 production??? A production line would be a nightmare in terms of logistics and the Su-35 would have a highly difficult time integrating with the PLAAF. Why would China need Su-35s if they already have J-20s? The reason for the purchase was to make up for the delay in the J-11D program and the need for an immediate air superiority operations, particularly in the SCS. Another 48 orders would be completely illogical, especially given the state of the J-20 and the J-16.
> 
> 
> Indeed. Especially since the Chinese tried so hard to reduce the 48 initially required by the Russians to only 24.


I think Su35 is a great add to PLAAF. As to why China need Su35 if we already have J20? This is a pseudo-proposition.

Su35 is not the future for sure, it's the force now.

Su35 is a perfect proxy to do dirty work for j20 in SCS and patrol around Taiwan.

Why I need a Lamborghini when I already have a Buggati Veyron？what kind of lame logic is that?

歼20乃国之重器，岂可轻易示人。

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

from their serial numbers it seems as if the final batch is either already delivered or close to delivery.


----------



## seesonic

wanglaokan said:


> I think Su35 is a great add to PLAAF. As to why China need Su35 if we already have J20? This is a pseudo-proposition.
> 
> Su35 is not the future for sure, it's the force now.
> 
> Su35 is a perfect proxy to do dirty work for j20 in SCS and patrol around Taiwan.
> 
> Why I need a Lamborghini when I already have a Buggati Veyron？what kind of lame logic is that?
> 
> 歼20乃国之重器，岂可轻易示人。



Meh indian fighter pilot white will tell you why buy SU35 when PLAAF has J20.

Be on a lookout.


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sheik

Figaro said:


> I disagree. First, the Russians would never consent to another license agreement, especially after the J-11 fiasco. Even then, I highly doubt the Chinese would do so as they would be an embarrassment of their aviation industry as many observers will undoubtedly question domestic aircraft. Moreover, why in the world would China order more Su-35s or induct a production line if they can just speed up J-20 production??? A production line would be a nightmare in terms of logistics and the Su-35 would have a highly difficult time integrating with the PLAAF. Why would China need Su-35s if they already have J-20s? The reason for the purchase was to make up for the delay in the J-11D program and the need for an immediate air superiority operations, particularly in the SCS. Another 48 orders would be completely illogical, especially given the state of the J-20 and the J-16. In actual combat, I am pretty concerned about the inter-connectivity of the Su-35 with other PLAAF fighters.
> 
> 
> Indeed. Especially since the Chinese tried so hard to reduce the 48 initially required by the Russians to only 24. I think the PLAAF really wanted to test the J-20's WVR and BVR capabilities against the a very capable warplane ...



I think it's also to address the approach of the Taiwan acquirement campaign, as expected very likely to happen in the next few years. It's like the building of extra 052C's while 052D is on its way, and building more 053H3's while 054 was already being built. Same logic. PLA wants to be better prepared for the upcoming war.


----------



## Figaro

sheik said:


> I think it's also to address the approach of the Taiwan acquirement campaign, as expected very likely to happen in the next few years. It's like the building of extra 052C's while 052D is on its way, and building more 053H3's while 054 was already being built. Same logic. PLA wants to be better prepared for the upcoming war.


Upcoming war??? You seriously think that the PLA is planning to invade Taiwan in the near future? Such an event would basically reverse China's decades of progress ... and I don't think 24 Su-35s is seriously enough for any prolonged operation.


----------



## LKJ86

https://m.weibo.cn/1240246333/4239503516219093

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

It doesn't make sense to induct more Su35 if it can't integrate with Chinese weapon systems.

For example PL10 and PL15 for Su35.

The best part of Su35 is the super manuverabity.


----------



## LKJ86

2018.5.13

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 帅的一匹

What a sexy ***

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LKJ86

Deino said:


> View attachment 474274

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## LKJ86

Come back.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HRK

plz translate


LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 475706
> View attachment 475707
> View attachment 475708
> View attachment 475709


----------



## LKJ86

HRK said:


> plz translate


1. No technology transfer
2. The manoeuvrability of Su-35 is obviously better than that of J-11B
3. The radar of Su-35 is inferior to that of J-10C
4. ...

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Figaro

LKJ86 said:


> 1. No technology transfer
> 2. The manoeuvrability of Su-35 is obviously better than that of J-11B
> 3. The radar of Su-35 is inferior to that of J-10C
> 4. ...


Obviously ... the J-10C uses AESA while the Su-35 uses PESA. Isn’t this common sense ... TVC is better than non TVC? This poster is re-stating the obvious.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

Figaro said:


> Obviously ... the J-10C uses AESA while the Su-35 uses PESA. Isn’t this common sense ... TVC is better than non TVC? This poster is re-stating the obvious.


I think the poster just talk for sake of talking. Buying 24 the minimal require more or less tells you something.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Deino

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 478586




Again that strange pod under the wings. Any idea ???


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## LKJ86

https://m.weibo.cn/1971538745/4249765258230383


----------



## LKJ86




----------



## LKJ86

https://m.weibo.cn/1240246333/4252160654717986

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 479677
> View attachment 479678
> View attachment 479679
> 
> https://m.weibo.cn/1971538745/4249765258230383





LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 481014
> 
> View attachment 481015



Again ... a brief translated summary would be kind!?? PLEASE.


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GeHAC

Deino said:


> Again ... a brief translated summary would be kind!?? PLEASE.


It's rumored that Russia does not allow the L band antenna in the flaps of Su35s exported to China for it's highly confidential. While without the device, the plane cannot be properly checked before delivery. So a temporary replicate was made by China for checking purpose. (Unconfirmed)

http://www.fyjs.cn/data/attachment/forum/201806/16/183937sxjou5a7chyllauw.jpg

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 帅的一匹

Russians dont trust us at all, we shall bear it in.mind.

if USA falls, the polar bear will turn agianst us with.less than a second. so i still hope USA can hang on at Asia pacific at the.moment.

remember dog always eat shit, people wont change their nature.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## LKJ86

Five more Su-35 to China in June 29.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 489860
> View attachment 489861



Now also the Su-35 drivers have that new helmet.


----------



## LKJ86

Deino said:


> Now also the Su-35 drivers have that new helmet.
> 
> View attachment 489874







https://m.weibo.cn/1971538745/4263185235860478


----------



## LKJ86




----------



## LKJ86

https://www.guancha.cn/XiYaZhou/2018_08_26_469621_7.shtml

*Baidu Translate*:
When the Su-35 fighter plane was just received by the PLA, it was once piloted by former Su-27SK pilots, and it was highly rated for what was good, including improvements in avionics. But... After a period of use, everyone's views have changed. Especially, although some auxiliary equipment of the aircraft still can not meet the needs of participating in the "Golden Helmet" and other competitions, the aircraft can only work with neighboring troops such as the J-10C and other 3.5-generation fighters of our army to carry out some research nature of the "counter-training"... But it has been very obvious that the Su-35 avionics equipment in the actual combat confrontation conditions, there is no advantage, but often in a bullied situation. Especially in electronic countermeasure, the Su-35, which uses passive array radar, faces the J-10C, which uses active array, and basically has only been suppressed.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 帅的一匹

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 494387
> 
> https://www.guancha.cn/XiYaZhou/2018_08_26_469621_7.shtml
> 
> *Baidu Translate*:
> When the Su-35 fighter plane was just received by the PLA, it was once piloted by former Su-27SK pilots, and it was highly rated for what was good, including improvements in avionics. But... After a period of use, everyone's views have changed. Especially, although some auxiliary equipment of the aircraft still can not meet the needs of participating in the "Golden Helmet" and other competitions, the aircraft can only work with neighboring troops such as the J-10C and other 3.5-generation fighters of our army to carry out some research nature of the "counter-training"... But it has been very obvious that the Su-35 avionics equipment in the actual combat confrontation conditions, there is no advantage, but often in a bullied situation. Especially in electronic countermeasure, the Su-35, which uses passive array radar, faces the J-10C, which uses active array, and basically has only been suppressed.


so no need further investment in Su35.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

wanglaokan said:


> so no need further investment in Su35.


Who say going to further invest in Su-35? I am sure, Su-35 is purchase to facilitate selling of Chinese subsystem like military chipset, axuiliary , ship engine to Russia. The purchase is merely symbolic. Same as S-400 is bought covered back some funded already invested in initial R&D of S-400 system. As you know money will never recovered from Russian once you passed to them.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 帅的一匹

Beast said:


> Who say going to further invest in Su-35? I am sure, Su-35 is purchase to facilitate selling of Chinese subsystem like military chipset, axuiliary , ship engine to Russia. The purchase is merely symbolic. Same as S-400 is bought covered back some funded already invested in initial R&D of S-400 system. As you know money will never recovered from Russian once you passed to them.


its kind of wasting taxpayer money


----------



## LKJ86

There is a rumor that PLAAF will order more Su-35 on Zhuhai Airshow-2018. @Beast @wanglaokan


----------



## 帅的一匹

LKJ86 said:


> There is a rumor that PLAAF will order more Su-35 on Zhuhai Airshow-2018. @Beast @wanglaokan


to make Russian happy?


----------



## LKJ86

wanglaokan said:


> to make Russian happy?


We need to wait and see.


----------



## 帅的一匹

每次买点鹅毛的东西都大张旗鼓，恨不得让全世界都知道。鹅毛买我们的东西就是低调的恨不得藏着掖着，两个字就是没劲。但凡政府有点决心台湾早就收回来了， 像现在这样拖得不死不活的。就是把歼星舰给了兔子都没用，不想打仗你说咋办。

习虽说反腐不错，但是小危企业和小商贩确实在他手上死了大把。前两年股市杠杆操作导致崩盘，结果直接导致房价涨了一倍。任重而道远。基本就是经济白痴。


----------



## Deino

wanglaokan said:


> 每次买点鹅毛的东西都大张旗鼓，恨不得让全世界都知道。鹅毛买我们的东西就是低调的恨不得藏着掖着，两个字就是没劲。但凡政府有点决心台湾早就收回来了， 像现在这样拖得不死不活的。就是把歼星舰给了兔子都没用，不想打仗你说咋办。
> 
> 习虽说反腐不错，但是小危企业和小商贩确实在他手上死了大把。前两年股市杠杆操作导致崩盘，结果直接导致房价涨了一倍。任重而道远。基本就是经济白痴。



Please give a translated summary. It's a rule of this forum.


----------



## 帅的一匹

Deino said:


> Please give a translated summary. It's a rule of this forum.


i say we should not spend money on buying Su35.


----------



## Figaro

LKJ86 said:


> There is a rumor that PLAAF will order more Su-35 on Zhuhai Airshow-2018. @Beast @wanglaokan


If so, that is an idiotic proposition on behalf of the procurement department



wanglaokan said:


> to make Russian happy?


I'm sure China isn't going to waste billions of dollars just to make Russia happy ... doesn't make any sense. Russia needs China much more than vice versa


----------



## Beast

LKJ86 said:


> There is a rumor that PLAAF will order more Su-35 on Zhuhai Airshow-2018. @Beast @wanglaokan


The rumour state how many will be bought this time?


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LKJ86

第一阶段合同。。。


----------



## Deino

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 505408
> 
> 
> 第一阶段合同。。。



Please ... an English summary!!!


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beast

Talk about Su-35 unit (0.00min to 8.40min), the pilot of Su-35 claim the TVC gives it a massive advantage against non TVC during dog fight. A pilot who flies from Su-27 - Su-30 to Su-35 claimed Su-35 is a leap of generation compare to the previous fighter he flows. The unit of Su-35 claimed the network sharing system of it helps them to share info and fight more effectively as a unit by covering for each other.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## LKJ86




----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## LKJ86




----------



## JSCh




----------



## LKJ86

Su-35 vs J-16




*Q2：行了别吹了，你老实说，苏-35的机载设备还有武器啥的，水平是不是不咋地？*

A2：这个事儿您不能一巴掌打死嘛！N035E“雪豹”PESA雷达，是实用化机载PESA雷达中的终极产品，性能特点鲜明，体现了俄军防空作战中的一些独特的技术要求。例如其阵面可转动，探测范围更大；在小角度范围（相当于HUD投影范围）对单个目标“凝视”探测时，具备350千米以上的探测距离——不过这一模式需要预警机的支援才能更好发挥。

而且受原理限制，“雪豹”的工作距离相关指标相比歼-16的AESA雷达有差距，例如前者的上视探测距离，仅略大于后者对同类目标的下视探测距离；对地/海工作模式也不如歼-16的雷达丰富。

另外，受限于俄光学器件产业水平，其OLS-35前视光电雷达（IRST）的性能也远不如歼-16同类设备；两者机载电子侦察能力各有千秋，但苏-35机载电子干扰设备在架构和工艺上较落后。如果歼-16的探测能力和电子战能力均设为10分，那么苏-35则可对应打8.5分和8分。

在机载武器领域，RVV-SD（R-77改进出口型）和RVV-MD（R-73改进出口型）的性能堪称平平无奇，落后于霹雳-15和霹雳-10；即使把传说中的KS-172超远程空空导弹拿来出口，其性能也弱于歼-16配套的国产型号；引进的空地和空舰导弹基本是苏-30配套武器的改进型，仅部分型号有一定借鉴价值。

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mohrenn

Why would they want to buy more Su-35 ?
We don't know what kind of underground deals or informal thing is going on. But you know, buying military equipment is always nice to keep good relations I guess, it's a common thing.


----------



## JohnWick

Mohrenn said:


> Why would they want to buy more Su-35 ?
> We don't what kind of underground deals or informal thing is going on. But you know, buying military equipment is always good to keep good relations I guess.


For cloning.


----------



## Mohrenn

JohnWick said:


> For cloning.



Wrong.


----------



## JohnWick

Mohrenn said:


> Wrong.


They bought su-27 and cloned it to make j-11 also they bought su-30mkm and cloned to make j-16.


----------



## JohnWick

Mohrenn said:


> Don't believe random things you read on the internet, J-11 is based on the Su-27, that was 20 years ago, J-16 is based on J-11. Su-30MKK wasn't bought to be copied but to fill the gap till they developed their own longer range striker. Furthermore now that they got Su-35 it should be enough shouldn't it ? Why are they planning on buying more ? Because it's not about copying, especially when they already have better planes.


I will say only one thing 
Is J-20 is a compatible Aircraft?


----------



## Mohrenn

JohnWick said:


> I will say only one thing
> Is J-20 is a compatible Aircraft?



Compatible with what ?


----------



## JohnWick

Mohrenn said:


> Compatible with what ?


With the skills like that of F-22 which is 30 years old craft but still dominate it...


----------



## Mohrenn

JohnWick said:


> With the skills like that of F-22 which is 30 years old craft but still dominate it...


 
A better question is how a country that had a 30 years headstart ends up being nearly caught up now.


----------



## JohnWick

Mohrenn said:


> A better question is how a country that had a 30 years headstart ends up being nearly caught up now.


Well it means still China is still 30 years before....thought again on it.


----------



## Mohrenn

JohnWick said:


> Well it means still China is still 30 years before....thought again on it.



I always had difficulties explaining simple things to people who seem limited, I just don't know how to word it in a way that you could understand. If you started running twenty years ago and I started just ten years ago, and I'm about to pass you, I'm not twenty years behind you, I'm not even ten years behind you, you're the slow one for struggling to keep me off despite starting way before me, you understand ?

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Beast

JohnWick said:


> With the skills like that of F-22 which is 30 years old craft but still dominate it...


I dont take the bait F-22 is the dominant. In terms of aerodynamic, with its raw thrust to weight ratio. Sure its the best but when comes to sensor, information sharing. F-22 may even lack behind J-20. No EOTAS for situation awareness and its high coating maintenance using older stealth coating technology is a nightmare. It needs an aircon hangar and repeat recoat every few weeks.

F-35 is the more up todate 5th gen fighter with the latest situation awareness battle system (EOTAS )and network sharing but again it lacks the raw sheer power of F-22.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JohnWick

Mohrenn said:


> I always had difficulties explaining simple things to people who seem limited, I just don't know how to word it in a way that you could understand. If you started running twenty years ago and I started just ten years ago, and I'm about to pass you, I'm not twenty years behind you, I'm not even ten years behind you, you're the slow one for struggling to keep me off despite starting way before me, you understand ?


I will say only thing 
You still not made a fighter Aircraft compareable to F-22.You could not compete with America's 30 years old tech.
I repeat it again in some more simple words even kids can understand it.
US made a jet named F-22 30years ago.
After thirty years you are still not able to make a one like it.and After thirty years US has cutting edge technology advantage over this old tech 30 years ago.And you are saying that we are about to over run them.How it can be done when you still can't beat there 30 years old tech.?....


----------



## Beast

JohnWick said:


> I will say only thing
> You still not made a fighter Aircraft compareable to F-22.You could not compete with America's 30 years old tech.
> I repeat it again in some more simple words even kids can understand it.
> US made a jet named F-22 30years ago.
> After thirty years you are still not able to make a one like it.and After thirty years US has cutting edge technology advantage over this old tech 30 years ago.And you are saying that we are about to over run them.How it can be done when you still can't beat there 30 years old tech.?....



Then what is J-20 with EOTAS and DSI? May I ask?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mohrenn

Beast said:


> I dont take the bait F-22 is the dominant. In terms of aerodynamic, with its raw thrust to weight ratio. Sure its the best but when comes to sensor, information sharing. F-22 may even lack behind J-20. No EOTAS for situation awareness and its high coating maintenance using older stealth coating technology is a nightmare. It needs an aircon hangar and repeat recoat every few weeks.
> 
> F-35 is the more up todate 5th gen fighter with the latest situation awareness battle system (EOTAS )and network sharing but again it lacks the raw sheer power of F-22.



I like to argue by letting them get away with these things when I think that they logic is flawed even if they would be right on their premise. But yeah first of all the thing that was flying 30 years ago was a technology demonstrator not the real thing and the F22 definitely lags behind in a lot of areas



JohnWick said:


> I will say only thing
> You still not made a fighter Aircraft compareable to F-22.You could not compete with America's 30 years old tech.
> I repeat it again in some more simple words even kids can understand it.
> US made a jet named F-22 30years ago.
> After thirty years you are still not able to make a one like it.and After thirty years US has cutting edge technology advantage over this old tech 30 years ago.And you are saying that we are about to over run them.How it can be done when you still can't beat there 30 years old tech.?....



Dude I'm starting to believe you have some serious cognitive problems.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beast

Mohrenn said:


> I like to argue by letting them get away with these things when I think that they logic is flawed even if they would be right on their premise. But yeah first of all the thing that was flying 30 years ago was a technology demonstrator not the real thing and the F22 definitely lags behind in a lot of areas


A lot of fanboys just like to look at pure raw power but lack the real in depth of the overall system like radar, situation awareness and information sharing which is highly critical for a 5th gen fighter. A good 5th gen dont simply bank on pure raw power and fancy stealth. You still need the good system to get the see first and lock on to killed your foe. Lacking of EOTAS for F-22 is a serious degrade of its capabilities.

http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/ANAAQ37F35/Pages/default.aspx
F-22 dont have such things like the F-35. F-22 system is nowhere as capable as F-35 in information modern sharing combat era. I believe F-22 only work best when pair up with F-35. It F-35 gets shot down. F-22 will be in big trouble. Same as F-22 going alone against 5th gen enemy will be in serious disadvantage.

I dont take the bait, F-22 has the best stealth. The high mantenance stealth coating is difficult to get it tip top condition plus the lack of DSI like F-35 and J-20 to further refined the inlet gaps.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Akasa

JohnWick said:


> They bought su-27 and cloned it to make j-11 also they bought su-30mkm and cloned to make j-16.



J-16 isn't based on the Su-30MKM, which the Chinese never bought.


----------



## JohnWick

Akasa said:


> J-16 isn't based on the Su-30MKM, which the Chinese never bought.


It all based in om grand father su-30.


----------



## LKJ86

JohnWick said:


> It all based in om grand father su-30.


Su-27UBK -> J-11BS -> J-16

Su-27SK -> J-11A -> J-11B -> J-11D

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Akasa

JohnWick said:


> It all based in om grand father su-30.



It's based on the J-11BS.


----------



## Deino

Akasa said:


> It's based on the J-11BS.




No, the J-16 is clearly a Su-30MKK development. Just look at the airframe, the stronger gears, the taller tails plus tanks, the IFR-probe.


----------



## Akasa

Deino said:


> No, the J-16 is clearly a Su-30MKK development. Just look at the airframe, the stronger gears, the taller tails plus tanks, the IFR-probe.



If you look at the tips of the vertical stabilizers, they match that of the J-11BS, not the Su-30MKK.


----------



## Deino

Akasa said:


> If you look at the tips of the vertical stabilizers, they match that of the J-11BS, not the Su-30MKK.




No they don't. The whole structure is taller including the taller rudder even if fin-cap is indeed not squared.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Akasa

Deino said:


> No they don't. The whole structure is taller including the taller rudder even if fin-cap is indeed not squared.
> 
> View attachment 525639



Interesting. How did they manage to do that though, given that they weren't license-producing MKKs?


----------



## Deino

Akasa said:


> Interesting. How did they manage to do that though, given that they weren't license-producing MKKs?



... how did they manage to this for the J-15 given that they weren't license-producing Su-33 or how did they manage to this for the J-11BS given that they weren't license-producing Su-27UBK?

IMO by a decent analysis of the original parts and re-engineering. Or they got unofficially a licence that was never announced to the public??!! Just an idea.


----------



## Akasa

Deino said:


> ... how did they manage to this for the J-15 given that they weren't license-producing Su-33 or how did they manage to this for the J-11BS given that they weren't license-producing Su-27UBK?
> 
> IMO by a decent analysis of the original parts and re-engineering. Or they got unofficially a licence that was never announced to the public??!! Just an idea.



They had a T10K prototype from Ukraine from which they developed the J-15. The initial license-produced Su-27SKs were from disassembled kits that could've given them a head start in developing the 11BS, or perhaps they took apart an UBK airframe.

I don't think there was ever reports of a MKK being disassembled (which would cause logistical issues) or the Chinese pursuing a license (which surely would've been reported by the Russians). The mystery remains.


----------



## 925boy

Mohrenn said:


> A better question is how a country that had a 30 years headstart ends up being nearly caught up now.


Succesful persistent large scale industrial espionage.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

Akasa said:


> They had a T10K prototype from Ukraine from which they developed the J-15. The initial license-produced Su-27SKs were from disassembled kits that could've given them a head start in developing the 11BS, or perhaps they took apart an UBK airframe.
> 
> I don't think there was ever reports of a MKK being disassembled (which would cause logistical issues) or the Chinese pursuing a license (which surely would've been reported by the Russians). The mystery remains.



Yes, for the J-15 my reply was more a joke, however for the J-11BS and J-16 they could have easily studiey the structure of of of those MKKs, which were destroyed in that storm a few years after delivery.


----------



## Mohrenn

925boy said:


> Succesful persistent large scale industrial espionage.



Persistent large scale data protection incompetence

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pepsi Cola

925boy said:


> Succesful persistent large scale industrial espionage.



I thought it's a state secret? lmao

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

Deino said:


> they could have easily studiey the structure of of of those MKKs, which were destroyed in that storm a few years after delivery.


They were Su-27SKs in 1996.


----------



## LKJ86

Deino said:


> No, the J-16 is clearly a Su-30MKK development. Just look at the airframe, the stronger gears, the taller tails plus tanks, the IFR-probe.


If you are SAC and have developed J-11BS already, will you choose to copy Su-30MKK from zero, or develop J-16 on the base of J-11BS inspired by Su-30MKK?
Besides, you must know that J-16 and Su-30MKK have different interior structures.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kuge

any news of j11D? or its dead?


----------



## LKJ86

925boy said:


> Succesful persistent large scale industrial espionage.


Do you think that J-16 has the same radar, IFR-probe, engines, flight control system, cockpit, avionics system, weapons, and so on, as Su-30MKK?


----------



## Akasa

kuge said:


> any news of j11D? or its dead?



The most recent photo is from January 2018, so there is a chance that it is still being tested. There were also several satellite photos purporting to show multiple J-11Ds at an airfield.











@星海军事 your thoughts?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

LKJ86 said:


> If you are SAC and have developed J-11BS already, will you choose to copy Su-30MKK from zero, or develop J-16 on the base of J-11BS inspired by Su-30MKK?
> Besides, you must know that J-16 and Su-30MKK have different interior structures.



I must admit I'm not entirely sure, especially since the structural issues/detail I mentioned are too similar to a MKK and different to a regular J-11B/BS:


J-11BS maiden flight 2008
J-16 maiden flight in late 2011

IMO SAC surely knew the structural differences between a Su-27SK and UBK and as such the BS is based on the improved airframe SAC has developed for the J-11B, but mated with a standard twin-seater front cockpit.

The J-16 however differs too much from the BS and is more related to the MKK. I'm sure it is not a 1:1 "copy" but SAc included the changes well known by the MKK mated with new materials and structures to develop the J-16.


----------



## rcrmj

60% probability they will buy more Su-35, the production of J-20 is too slow atm, and J-11D isnt that "good" to replace J-11B``````given the fact that SAC is putting lots of resources on the new stealth fighter, I dont think J-11D would have a good prospect``

J-20 + the new stealth fight will be the first punch of PLAAF and PLAN in future, with "helps" from J-10C, J-16, J-15 and Su-35``````

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Akasa

rcrmj said:


> given the fact that SAC is putting lots of resources on the new stealth fighter, I dont think J-11D would have a good prospect



Why would they be mutually exclusive?


----------



## 925boy

Mohrenn said:


> Persistent large scale data protection incompetence


False. No data protection is 100% foolproof. If it cant be technologicaly compromised it can be humanly compromised. You think US was just putting its highly sensitive valuable expensive technological know-how in front of CHina to make it easy to steal? pls.



LKJ86 said:


> Do you think that J-16 has the same radar, IFR-probe, engines, flight control system, cockpit, avionics system, weapons, and so on, as Su-30MKK?


No, because my response you quoted was referencing J-16 in comparison to F-22, not Su-30MKK.


----------



## Mohrenn

925boy said:


> False. No data protection is 100% foolproof. If it cant be technologicaly compromised it can be humanly compromised. You think US was just putting its highly sensitive valuable expensive technological know-how in front of CHina to make it easy to steal? pls



No data protection is 100% foolproof but if China can access it as much as you say they can and so persistantly overs such a long span of time, you should probably ask yourself if there's a serious corruption or incompetence problem somewhere

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86




----------



## Deino

Just an amazing model of a PLAAF Su-35 built by @Yufei Mao  ... modelling in perfection. :-o 





__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=533658707151159


----------



## LKJ86




----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ozranger

Mohrenn said:


> No data protection is 100% foolproof but if China can access it as much as you say they can and so persistantly overs such a long span of time, you should probably ask yourself if there's a serious corruption or incompetence problem somewhere



LOL didn't you know that each recent US president including Bush's, Clinton, Obama and now Trump have ordered secret technology transfer to China in a way of pretending being hacked?

It is also so shocking that America's highly secured military network has physical connectivity with the Internet. China must have really appreciated this intentional help.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Deino

I would like to know for what purpose this strange pod is?


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Deino

Visible are 3 Su-30MKK and 5 Su-35 assigned to the 6. Brigade at Suixi


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## T-72B

Happy Chinese new year guys

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## LKJ86



Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## JSCh

*Russia completes deliveries of Su-35 fighter jets to China*
April 16, 17:07UTC+3

The contract worth about $2.5 billion on the deliveries of 24 fighter jets to China was signed in 2015



*Su-35 fighter jet*
© Marina Lystseva/TASS

MOSCOW, April 16. /TASS/. Russia has completed the deliveries of Sukhoi Su-35 generation 4++ fighter jets to China under a contract signed earlier, Russia’s Federal Service for Military and Technical Cooperation told TASS on Tuesday.

"In compliance with the contract, all the Su-35 planes have been delivered to the foreign customer," the Federal Service said.

China has been the first foreign buyer of Russian Su-35 fighter aircraft. The contract worth about $2.5 billion on the deliveries of 24 fighter jets to China was signed in 2015. The contract also stipulates the delivery of ground equipment and reserve engines.

Indonesia is the second foreign buyer of Russian Su-35 fighter jets. Reports emerged in early 2018 that Russia had signed a contract with Indonesia on the delivery of 11 fighters. Under the contract, Russia is due to deliver the first fighter jets to Indonesia this year. The fulfillment of the Indonesian contract ran across some difficulties related to US sanctions but a TASS source in military and diplomatic circles said these difficulties "are not critical" and should not affect the deliveries of fighter jets.

The Su-35S generation 4++ supersonic fighter jet performed its debut flight on February 19, 2008. The fighter jet is a derivative of the Su-27 plane. The Su-35S weighs 19 tonnes, has a service ceiling of 20,000 meters, can develop a maximum speed of 2,500 km/h and has a crew of one pilot. The fighter jet’s armament includes a 30mm aircraft gun, up to 8 tonnes of the weapon payload (missiles and bombs of various types) on 12 underwing hardpoints. The Su-35S has been in service with the Russian Army since 2015.



TASS: Military & Defense - Russia completes deliveries of Su-35 fighter jets to China


----------



## JSCh

27 JUN, 08:32
*Russia offers to sell new batch of Su-35 fighter jets to China — government service*

China was the first country to purchase Russia's Su-35 fighter jets





© Yuri Smityuk/TASS​
KUBINKA, June 27. /TASS/. Russia has offered to sell another batch of Su-35 fighter jets to China, the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation told TASS on the sidelines of the "Army-2019" forum.

"We are expecting a response from China on our offer to purchase modern weapons and military equipment manufactured in Russia, including additional batches of Su-35 fighter jets," the service said.

China was the first country to purchase Russia's Su-35 fighter jets. The contract on the purchase of 24 fighter jets worth around $2.5 bln was signed in 2015.

The service informed TASS in April that all fighter jets were delivered to China in the framework of the first contract.


Russia offers to sell new batch of Su-35 fighter jets to China — government service - Military & Defense - TASS


----------



## SOHEIL

What's the reason behind importing Su-35s from Russia when you have J-20 and flanker copies?


----------



## Pakhtoon yum

SOHEIL said:


> What's the reason behind importing Su-35s from Russia when you have J-20 and flanker copies?


Engine deal

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Deino

SOHEIL said:


> What's the reason behind importing Su-35s from Russia when you have J-20 and flanker copies?



IMO a mixed two-folded deal with a political and military related decision since it gives the PLAAF an immediate plus on at least one Brigade, the insight into the latest Russian technology - especially their radar, FCS and engine - and the ability to explore TVC in real aerial combat and was a strong political testimony to Russia's friendship.

The often mentioned engine deal is IMO only a secondary reason, since there is no deal on the engine. All are delivered by the manufactor and maintenance will be done in Russia.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## serenity

SOHEIL said:


> What's the reason behind importing Su-35s from Russia when you have J-20 and flanker copies?





Deino said:


> IMO a mixed two-folded deal with a political and military related decision since it gives the PLAAF an immediate plus on at least one Brigade, the insight into the latest Russian technology - especially their radar, FCS and engine - and the ability to explore TVC in real aerial combat and was a strong political testimony to Russia's friendship.
> 
> The often mentioned engine deal is IMO only a secondary reason, since there is no deal on the engine. All are delivered by the manufactor and maintenance will be done in Russia.



606 Institute or whoever designs and whoever manufactures the WS10 type and WS15 type cannot copy the Russian engine on Su-35 which is called 117. Engine design in China is very mature. Manufacturing is not very mature. The theory is all okay behind turbofan. I'm sure even Japan, Korea, and India are more similar levels as well. The difficult parts is the last few details and definitely in the fabrication and material secrets. You cannot copy engine like you cannot uncook egg.

WS15 is reworked from previous design which was nearly completed but kept having problems in testing final stages and PLAAF was not 100% happy. Then design was forced to adopt the newest material technology that was only became researched after WS15 first type was already designed. This engine is for future J-20 types and maybe even future Shengyang fighters like J-11X, J-15X, J-16X. If reliable enough, maybe even for J-10X.

117 is worth studying definitely. It lets us see Russian methods for thrust vector and Russian way of using it with new flight control on newest Su-35. Then we evaluate radar, evaluate training against our forces, and evaluate their latest technology which may be used for T-50 and maybe for future exports to countries like India.

Another big reason is because J-11D was rejected by PLAAF. Most public reasons are the radar was not good enough but this is really actually easy to fix since J-10C, J-15, J-16, and J-20 radars are all up to expectation so that's not a good reason. Main reason J-11D rejected probably because flight performance is not better than J-11B. Using same Al31 engine or WS10 cannot compare with Su-35 with 117 with thrust vector and newest flight control that combine more powerful engine and vectoring. Su-35 also solves some flight characteristics that Shengyang have not improved from old flanker. So Su-35 compared to old J-11 is like supercar compared to van. But PLAAF also still want more heavy fighters while Chengdu very slowly builds J-20 and Shengyang is busy with J-16, J-16 electronic attack and J-15 electronic attack. Both are very busy with unmanned next generations and Shengyang also maybe working on FC-31.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Beast

SOHEIL said:


> What's the reason behind importing Su-35s from Russia when you have J-20 and flanker copies?


And if Su-35 is really that good. Why order only 24 which is the minimum order number set by Russia? No further follow up. Its more of a political decision to improve trade deficiency with Russia as Russia has complaint exporting raw material and non finish product while import large quantity of China products like electronic and machinery.

Another reason is study the Russian 117S engine. China now has its own unique TVC which is demonstrated during Zuhuai 2018 airshow. But its always good to further study other design to further is knowledge and widen the design ideal.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Ali_Baba

I cannot see China ordering any more Su35s. The Su35s have served their purpose, for China, very very well for what they were intended. A chance to inspect the latest and best of Russia aviation capabilities.

Given the poor performance of the AAMs for Russian aircraft, it will be outgunned by all modern aircraft regardless of the performance of its radar system.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Figaro

Deino said:


> IMO a mixed two-folded deal with a political and military related decision since it gives the PLAAF an immediate plus on at least one Brigade, the insight into the latest Russian technology - especially their radar, FCS and engine - and the ability to explore TVC in real aerial combat and was a strong political testimony to Russia's friendship.
> 
> The often mentioned engine deal is IMO only a secondary reason, since there is no deal on the engine. All are delivered by the manufactor and maintenance will be done in Russia.


I heard that the Su-35 did not perform well in beyond visual range aerial combat against the likes of the J-10C. I'm not sure buying the Su-35 now (especially with China's new TVC) would be wise, even if it was for within visual range fight

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## 055_destroyer

Figaro said:


> I heard that the Su-35 did not perform well in beyond visual range aerial combat against the likes of the J-10C. I'm not sure buying the Su-35 now (especially with China's new TVC) would be wise, even if it was for within visual range fight









China may disassemble all radar of Su-35 and replaced it with domestic radar as demonstrated by these imported Su-30MKK fitted with PL-12 missiles. I am sure the radar is replaced with domestic one as try integrating foreign missiles into another radar without source code is too hassle.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## serenity

If we purchase more Su35 to prove its usefulness. It will be using Chinese radars and systems for electronic sensors and jamming. Only if Su35 can shoot Chinese missiles then we will buy more than 24. Russian missiles are not good against American missiles or Chinese missiles. We will not be able to match Americans or Japanese in case anything happens. But Su35 is still much better than J-11B and J-11B is only PLAAF fighter of fourth generation with two engines that only focus on air to air mission unlike the Su-30 and J-16. J-20 is very expensive for China and manufacturing complete ones are too slow for now. So PLAAF wants better fourth generation air to air fighter of heavy weight class and since J-11B stopped and J-11D is rejected, only makes sense to purchase more Su35 which is very powerful but if they can shoot Chinese missiles, will be even better for PLAAF otherwise will need to purchase and ship missiles from Russia all the time and cost us a lot of money.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lcloo

China should not buy any more SU-35. J16 and J10C can coordinate with J20 better as they all can share real time data. SU-35's incapability to use Chinese weapon is another minus point.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Figaro

Pakhtoon yum said:


> Engine deal


What engine deal? It's not like the Chinese took out the Su-35's engine and put them on the J-20 ... nor does it look like Russia transferred engine tech



lcloo said:


> China should not buy any more SU-35. J16 and J10C can coordinate with J20 better as they all can share real time data. SU-35's incapability to use Chinese weapon is another minus point.


Any more purchases of the Su-35 would raise serious questions about the state of the Chinese aviation program ... but it looks unlikely given the acquisition occurred almost 4 years ago

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

1. Su-35 is completely incompatible with Chinese equipments.

2. PLAAF is not satisfied with the EW capability of Su-35, and buys EW pods from Belarus for them.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## LKJ86

Via CCTV 7 and @沉默的山羊 from Weibo

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## LKJ86

Via @梦漪迟 from Weibo

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## LKJ86

Via @南部空军 from Weixin

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## LKJ86

Via @空军发布 from Weixin and @yankeesama的帧察小队 from Weibo

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## LKJ86

Via @梦漪迟 from Weibo

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## LKJ86

Via @空军在线 from Weibo

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino



Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 612329
> View attachment 612330
> 
> Via @空军发布 from Weixin and @yankeesama的帧察小队 from Weibo



If that is, or the equivalent of, Khibiny ECM at the wing tips, then its bad news for every one!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LKJ86

PanzerKiel said:


> If that is, or the equivalent of, Khibiny ECM at the wing tips, then its bad news for every one!


Su-35SK is incompatible with Chinese equipments.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PanzerKiel

LKJ86 said:


> Su-35SK is incompatible with Chinese equipments.



Chinese or Russian? I mean Khibiny is Russian equipment.


----------



## LKJ86

PanzerKiel said:


> Chinese or Russian? I mean Khibiny is Russian equipment.


Yep, and China has better ones, but Su-35SK can't take them.
It is also why PLAAF doesn't buy Su-35 any more...

Su-35SK is incompatible with Chinese equipments.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PanzerKiel

LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 612329
> View attachment 612330
> 
> Via @空军发布 from Weixin and @yankeesama的帧察小队 from Weibo



Then this could be KG300G self-defence jammer pod. No?


----------



## LKJ86

PanzerKiel said:


> Then this could be KG300G self-defence jammer pod. No?


Just pay attention to the ones that J-16 carries.



PanzerKiel said:


> If that is, or the equivalent of, Khibiny ECM at the wing tips, then its bad news for every one!


It was said they were from Belarus...



LKJ86 said:


> View attachment 586803
> 
> 
> 1. Su-35 is completely incompatible with Chinese equipments.
> 
> 2. PLAAF is not satisfied with the EW capability of Su-35, and buys EW pods from Belarus for them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## R Wing

LKJ86 said:


> Just pay attention to the ones that J-16 carries.
> 
> 
> It was said they were from Belarus...



How does this jet compare to the IAF Su-30 and upcoming Rafale?


----------



## LKJ86

R Wing said:


> How does this jet compare to the IAF Su-30 and upcoming Rafale?


Which jet?


----------



## R Wing

LKJ86 said:


> Which jet?



The Su-35. Am I in the wrong thread?

It's often difficult to compare capabilities across Russian jets esp. given the array of EW/sensor suites, etc.

Also, does this jet offer something to China that the J-20 and J-16 variants (etc) can't provide?


----------



## LKJ86

R Wing said:


> The Su-35. Am I in the wrong thread?


Su-35 would perform better than Su-30MKI for sure. But no ideas about Rafale.



R Wing said:


> Also, does this jet offer something to China that the J-20 and J-16 variants (etc) can't provide?


Nothing.


----------



## R Wing

LKJ86 said:


> Su-35 would perform better than Su-30MKI for sure. But no ideas about Rafale.
> 
> 
> Nothing.



Got it, thanks!


----------



## serenity

R Wing said:


> The Su-35. Am I in the wrong thread?
> 
> It's often difficult to compare capabilities across Russian jets esp. given the array of EW/sensor suites, etc.
> 
> *Also, does this jet offer something to China that the J-20 and J-16 variants (etc) can't provide?*



Yes. It shows Russian thrust vectoring performs and where is weaknesses and strengths and what to be careful of since Su-30MKI uses similar thrust vectoring design and control systems. It can simulate Su-30MKI movements better than any PLAAF fighter. This is useful. Chinese thrust vectoring design differed at least the J-10 experiment in TVC. Our own TVC research used a simpler and cheaper approach to do TVC according to some papers. These papers suggest the Russian methods are better overall in mechanical capability but quite more complex and expensive. Su-35 allows Chinese engineers to properly look through everything and evaluate performance of Russia's best fighter which Su-30MKI does not match so if PLAAF fighters can handle Su-35, it can handle and know better how to handle MKI. Anyway Su-35 and Su-30MKI both have V-figure TVC arrangement but Su-35 can work too against foreign airforces and 24 is good addition. Our J-11D program evaluated against J-16 and Su-35 wasn't good enough for the trouble so PLAAF just upgrade J-11B to AESA radars and accept modern missiles. Achieve the main improvements with minimal extra cost.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## LKJ86

serenity said:


> Our J-11D program evaluated against J-16 and Su-35 wasn't good enough for the trouble so PLAAF just upgrade J-11B to AESA radars and accept modern missiles.


Su-35SK and J-11D can be called PLAAF's backup plans for J-20.
And J-20 has exceeded original expectations, so the backup plans become meaningless.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## serenity

LKJ86 said:


> Su-35SK and J-11D can be called PLAAF's backup plans for J-20.
> And J-20 has exceeded original expectations, so the backup plans become meaningless.



Su-35 and J-11D or even J-16 which is better than both of those, are not ever going to be good J-20 backups if J-20 evaluation was not to PLAAF's satisfaction. Only if stealth and this main advantage of the new aircraft did not work. The main difference separating them is this stealth ability in terms of radar signature and also electronic signals management. The next generation of equipment also applies to J-10C and J-16. They are just as advanced as J-20 but focus on different things in different ways due to the more primary quality which is stealth in this case. Reality is if J-20 did not live up to standards in evaluation, they will have made it right or completely reject it and do another program that can compete with 5th generation. Su-35 and J-11D cannot do this and in this sense are not true backups.


----------



## LKJ86

serenity said:


> Su-35 and J-11D or even J-16 which is better than both of those, are not ever going to be good J-20 backups if J-20 evaluation was not to PLAAF's satisfaction.


Backup plans are not alternative plans.
If the development of J-20 is in trouble or delayed, PLAAF can still have 4.5th-generation heavyweight air superiority fighter options.



serenity said:


> Su-35 and J-11D or even J-16 which is better than both of those


Su-35 and J-11D are 4.5th-generation heavyweight air superiority fighters, while J-16 a 4.5th-generation heavyweight multi-role fighter.

For air combat, J-11D can defeat J-16. (J-11D > J-16 > Su-35SK)

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Deino

Via @空军在线 from Weibo


LKJ86 said:


> Su-35SK and J-11D can be called PLAAF's backup plans for J-20.
> And J-20 has exceeded original expectations, so the backup plans become meaningless.





So is the J-11D project still alive?


----------



## Beast

Deino said:


> Via @空军在线 from Weibo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So is the J-11D project still alive?


I think no.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jupiter2007

What is the production rate of J-11/J-16?


----------



## Figaro

serenity said:


> Yes. It shows Russian thrust vectoring performs and where is weaknesses and strengths and what to be careful of since Su-30MKI uses similar thrust vectoring design and control systems. It can simulate Su-30MKI movements better than any PLAAF fighter. This is useful. Chinese thrust vectoring design differed at least the J-10 experiment in TVC. Our own TVC research used a simpler and cheaper approach to do TVC according to some papers. These papers suggest the Russian methods are better overall in mechanical capability but quite more complex and expensive. Su-35 allows Chinese engineers to properly look through everything and evaluate performance of Russia's best fighter which Su-30MKI does not match so if PLAAF fighters can handle Su-35, it can handle and know better how to handle MKI. Anyway Su-35 and Su-30MKI both have V-figure TVC arrangement but Su-35 can work too against foreign airforces and 24 is good addition. Our J-11D program evaluated against J-16 and Su-35 wasn't good enough for the trouble so PLAAF just upgrade J-11B to AESA radars and accept modern missiles. Achieve the main improvements with minimal extra cost.


Honestly this was the best decision. Creating another series of J-11D without significant improvement would really not be worth the development and procurement costs ... much smarter to instead upgrade the J-11Bs and spend the money elsewhere.


----------



## LKJ86

Via @摇篮里的航海家 from Weibo

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Figaro

An excellent interview with a PLAAF officer about what the Chinese got out of the Su-35 purchase ... it is about a year old but I don't think it was posted on here. 


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/path%3D%252Fr%252FLessCredibleDefence%252Fcomments%252Fajx4bx%252F


----------



## Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen

Figaro said:


> An excellent interview with a PLAAF officer about what the Chinese got out of the Su-35 purchase ... it is about a year old but I don't think it was posted on here.
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/path%3D%252Fr%252FLessCredibleDefence%252Fcomments%252Fajx4bx%252F



Su-35SM upgrade is getting AESA similar to the one used in Su-57.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## siegecrossbow

Figaro said:


> An excellent interview with a PLAAF officer about what the Chinese got out of the Su-35 purchase ... it is about a year old but I don't think it was posted on here.
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/path%3D%252Fr%252FLessCredibleDefence%252Fcomments%252Fajx4bx%252F



It was an interview with Yankeesama, a military enthusiast with family members in the military, not a PLA officer.


----------



## LKJ86

Via @空军在线 from Weibo

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Deino

Interesting to see the Su-30MKK, which are now acting as trainers within the 6th Air Brigade at Suixi.


----------



## no smoking

Figaro said:


> Honestly this was the best decision. Creating another series of J-11D without significant improvement would really not be worth the development and procurement costs ... much smarter to instead upgrade the J-11Bs and spend the money elsewhere.



If my memory is right, according to "空军厂" in CJ, J-16 is an upgrade of Su-30MKK through traditional way: better weapon, better electronic, etc, but . J-11D is a new upgrading concept: using AI to partially or totally replace the back seat.


----------



## LKJ86

Via @空军在线 from Weibo

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------

