Are we able to make an aircraft like F-16?

[rcrmj]

Oh Dear!
So these are your papers and articles?

First is a product data sheet of a Microwave Power Module based on GaN. It is not even a TRM of a AESA. FYI Here is a basic block diagram of a T/R M.

What you have here is only the power amp portion of this device. It is not even a complete T/R Module.

Second is a news article about how US is getting worried about China getting GaN technology. Sure!

Rest are all research papers in various subjects from Electronic system design, DBDP, etc etc. You didn't even care to point out how they are related to GaN T/R Modules! Just pure spam.

kid first to learn Chinese and to read through all the links and stuff, before making funny jokes like the MTU before

 

[EndangeredSpecies]

and again lol at your funny theory of why most Chinese project papers and research papers are in Chinese. What`` now you've become a Chinese expert on our social and science system? ridiculous at most I have to say ````kid, Chinese and Japanese are the two most used language on PCT application paper and published nature science research papers after English ok? do more research before lashing out funny comments``

Yeah sure you moron! AFTER ENGLISH! And that excludes all the English Speaking community. Get it through your stupid Chinese skull and please for the love of God, give '`' key a rest. It looks horrendous!

 

[rcrmj]

Those links show that Chinese are making MODULES with GaN,
Not that there are complete AESA Radars - IN PRODUCTION.
Your claim that J-20 is using GaN is countered by the claim that it will not be available for 3-8 years.
Your claim has no credibility until You show material on GaN AESA radars.

You are on the ignore list as of now.

there are more than 20 J-20s in service (does not include those prototyps) so we speak, and 3 055s are under production, 8 more to come, `` if you really want to know how our defense info leaks work, you should ask another serious and respectable member Denio, he is quite familar with our end```

please dont shy away from reality```just like in 2010 on PDF, I said China has a 5th gen project going on and named J-20, and most ignorant people were laughing at it, call me nationalist or fanboy or whatever funny name they want to use```but reality slaps them real hard

oh, btw, the first GaN based modules were made in Japan, and the U.S incorporates quite a few techs from it for its APG-77A```

 

[EndangeredSpecies]

Turbofan engine, and you listed MTU?

Yeah I did, Incase you didn't know about them :-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTU_Aero_Engines

 

[rcrmj]

Yeah sure you moron! AFTER ENGLISH! And that excludes all the English Speaking community. Get it through your stupid Chinese skull and please for the love of God, give '`' key a rest. It looks horrendous!

an ignorant brat went nuts`` I like it very much`````

 

[EndangeredSpecies]

You are on the ignore list as of now.

Thats the only sensible solution

 

[rcrmj]

Yeah I did, Incase you didn't know about them :-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTU_Aero_Engines

yes yes wiki wiki very realiable```has MTU ever made a complete high thrust or medium thrust turbofan jet engine yet? dont tell me E200 was developed by it```omg``you might have a point if you are arguing diesel or turbo engine for ships```

 

[cloneman]

Russians and Americans have quite a few close encounters with each other and we know how it ends. Basically, Chinese weapons have nothing which proves that they are anyway effective. Think about it, these weapons are not used for decades and only put to some real use in a crisis situation. Which gives incentives to those who build weapons to omit tail cases or edge scenarios. If a weapon will not be used for most of the time when a weapons manufacturer has shipped it, why to make it perfect? Better load it with buzzwords and eye popping stats. Will I like to depend upon a proven design by a country known for its military industrial complex or will I opt from the new boy in the block.

Let China fight couple of wars with her own weapons and prove to the world that they indeed work. In industry we call it eat-your-own-dog-food. Let China first eat her own dog food only then they can be trusted.

Fourth fifth sixth generation planes are meaningless if they fail to perform -- a common problem with wannabies and new kids on the block.

Want to know the most effective weapon? It is AK47. Old, mass produced, with a very high reliability, requires no skills, no servicing and the most battle tested weapon. F-16s are AK-47 --rather M-16-- of fighters.

The funniest thing about wars and crisis is that often the most reliable triumphs over a new flashy technology and buzz word heavy weapon. Patton tank anyone?

Historical record? We crushed your slum army in 1962,with our homemade weapon,
Today's combat record,see the link below:https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chinese-weapon-exports.273332/
Yes,We have faith in our homemade weapon,unlike some third world southern asian country who has to rely on its white master.

 

[EndangeredSpecies]

Historical record? We crushed your slum army in 1962,with our homemade weapon,
Today's combat record,see the link below:https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/chinese-weapon-exports.273332/
Yes,We have faith in our homemade weapon,unlike some third world southern asian country who has to rely on its white master.

Irrelevant to discussion.
Exports are not combat record for fighter planes.

 

[rcrmj]

Irrelevant to discussion.
Exports are not combat record for fighter planes.

are you suggesting those Chinese weapon buyers are buying those kits for display on parade like your LCA``?
for the sake of the thread and your 'opinion', tell me which GaN AESA is "battle proven" or has sucessfully dealt with a Russian craft?

 

[Beast]

are you suggesting those Chinese weapon buyers are buying those kits for display on parade like your LCA``?
for the sake of the thread and your 'opinion', tell me which GaN AESA is "battle proven" or has sucessfully dealt with a Russian craft?

These new Indian is asking for a ban. I already reported his racism and name calling post. Let moderator deal with him and see how long can he survive here..

 

[denel]

Tell me, how many combats have your Chinese fighters seen? What was the kill record?

BTW, you have yet not substantiated your claim that only US and China are 'heavy player' -- or told us what does that term mean.

As far as papers in Chinese go, well, if you only get your research reviewed by Chinese, it defeats the purpose of peer-review. Why do you think all the other researchers and analysts publish their work in English? For peer-review! you moron! See, this is why no one trusts Chinese technology. You simply refuse to get it peer reviewed. It is not world responsibility to verify your claim but your responsibility to convince the world about your fantastic claims. And sorry to say Chinese is a pathetic language choice for global community. It is spoken only in China.

In the end you are a blow-hard Chinese moron drunk on the usual Chinese kool-aid. Dare to provide some substantial evidence on your claim about China and US being only 'heavy weight' player in avionics and radar technology?

dont waste your time arguing... it is pointless in this forums.

Of course, if you are behind, the Chinese would not start from scratch. You do not reinvent something that has already been done as otherwise you will never catch up.

I do not need to be in the field to have an opinion on this matter - all that is needed is a level of knowledge to form
a credible opinion on the matter.

For you to say that Chinese radar technology is 1-2 decades behind that of the West just blew your credibility out through the window. Do you have any top secret knowledge of the AESA radars that are going into the latest Chinese ships, SAMs and planes? No you do not just like everyone else here. All we can do is form opinions based on things like China initially winning the 2013 Turkish SAM competion against the best from US/EU and Russia. They did not get the contract in the end but if their radar technology was 1-2 decades behind the rest, Turkey would never have selected them in the first place.

Just because you had experience with Chinese Macpacks(networking radios) does not mean that the same applies to
other areas like radar etc. What may happen in one little area does not mean that the same will happen in other what may be considered more important areas.

that is fine..... worked across entire spectrum from radar, ew, ecm etc - ... manpack was just one simple example being given to show how far behind they are. This is one reason why anyone avoids chinese they will take and try to reverse engineer without any regard of copy rights.
If chinese cannot even make turbofan engine from scratch what else can one say. Just because you know how to drive does not mean you can build a car.
no more contribution to this thread... entire forum has become occupied with mud slingers who have no clue except emotional nationalism, racism and hatred.

 

[Beast]

dont waste your time arguing... it is pointless in this forums.


that is fine..... worked across entire spectrum from radar, ew, ecm etc - ... manpack was just one simple example being given to show how far behind they are. This is one reason why anyone avoids chinese they will take and try to reverse engineer without any regard of copy rights.
If chinese cannot even make turbofan engine from scratch what else can one say. Just because you know how to drive does not mean you can build a car.
no more contribution to this thread... entire forum has become occupied with mud slingers who have no clue except emotional nationalism, racism and hatred.

Really? FN-6 manpack is highly praised by user with strong resistance to ECM and main thing it is the customer who is too cheap to buy the older version of Manpack like QW-1 and QW-2. Dont blame Chinese product when its the customer who has no money to buy better one.

We dont need your opinion about Chinese weapon product when Iraq,Saudi and many other countries purchase large number of Chinese weapons who has nothing but praise of it.

 

[Raider 21]

As per reports JF-17 block 3 would be better than F-16 Block 52.

You are already manufacturing JF-17 Block 2 which are better than F-16 Block 40.

As an aerospace engineer and having worked on the F-16 Block 40, I beg to differ. The JF-17 Block 2 is a significant achievement but nowhere close to the F-16 Block 40. The F-16 has been built in around an open source architecture format whereas the JF-17 despite the successes, it still has a long long way to go....

 

[UKBengali]

Really? FN-6 manpack is highly praised by user with strong resistance to ECM and main thing it is the customer who is too cheap to buy the older version of Manpack like QW-1 and QW-2. Dont blame Chinese product when its the customer who has no money to buy better one.

We dont need your opinion about Chinese weapon product when Iraq,Saudi and many other countries purchase large number of Chinese weapons who has nothing but praise of it.

Did you notice that he did not respond to the Chinese HQ-9 initially winning the Turkish SAM competition against the best that the EU,US and Russians had to offer at the time? Says it all that he is calling everyone else clueless when he cannot back up his own statements with logic.