China All Su-35 news

[ptldM3]

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

China has the R&D to develop so called Typhoon’s Virgilus.

After that you stated:

Post #55

Nobody said China has already had the capability in Virgilus

It’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.

 

[antonius123]

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’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’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]

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]

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?

 

[ptldM3]

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.

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.

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?

Your intelectual problem seems so pathetic and laughable.

You spelled ‘intelectual’ wrong, it is spelled intellectual

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]

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’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 ‘capability‘. 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 ‘intelectual’ 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:

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‘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.

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]

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

 

[ptldM3]

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.

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:

China has r&d capability to develop so called Typhoon's virgilus ECM suit; someday Russia may buy it from china.

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 ‘moronic’ 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.

Thats what I said: you have verbal problem

No you just have piss poor grammar and the reading comprehension of a door nail.

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?

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.

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 “intelectual” problem but the joke backfired on you since you could not even spell intellectual.

You said u never said so??

this is your own post:

Further proof you can’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?

Now who is the liar?

You are, and you clearly can’t read.

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]

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]

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 ‘moronic’ 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 “intelectual” 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’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’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?

 

[antonius123]

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

 

[rcrmj]

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

 

[ptldM3]

Anybody else here understand easily the difference between r&d capability and capability in producing.

You clearly do not.

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.

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’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.

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?

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.

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.

Which ridiculous things that I have made?
Do you realize that you have demonstrated poor grammar?

You have made the ridiculous claim that China, “can merely produce even without R&D”. I would love an explanation to that.

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 ‘r&d’. Remember it was you that stated that a product can be produced without research and development.

When did I said that china currently can produce virgilous??

I only quoted you a half dozen times on it.

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.

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’s, just not a Virgilous. You understand? Are will you try twist my sentence around again?

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’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 proven yet.

Yes, it is very much proven. You are a liar.

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.