What's new

China's J-15 Carrier-Based Fighter is Inferior to Russian Su-33 fighter: Russia

Status
Not open for further replies.
there are several things that we know, the J-15 was indeed created with help but that help was in the form of a T-10 from Ukraine not a fully in production SU-33

the technology on board came mostly from the J-11B and the tech on board the decades old SU-33 was from the SU-27 and china has in its service the SU-27(and the SU-30) and had concluded that the J-11b is superior to the SU-27 in all aspects, rumors are abound that it carriers a AESA as well a a multitude of other improvements such as composite materials and obviously more modern hub. as for the development meeting difficulty check this -> China Defense Blog: Chinese poem of the day: Azolla ( go ask chinese members what it means when these poems come out

well your turn, wheres the proof that its not better

Exactly ... just that ..rumours ...
 
Exactly ... just that ..rumours ...

right since we dont have much to go on we can only decide based on what is known and the more credible rumors, for instance, j-15 comes after J-11B and has tech from it, if J-11B is superior to the su-27, and the Su-33 is about on par with a SU-27 then we have no reason to think that J-15 is no better than a SU-33
 
because the chinese tech needs to be proven first.



no.. in this case we have an italian made ferrari and a copy. Can the copy be better, yes there is no reason it cannot, but is this copy better than the original? needs to be proven first, but the development stages were rumoured to be plagued with problems... reasonably so.

Exactly ... just that ..rumours ...

Orthodox loyalties FTW. Amrite? If your country's air force is nothing to write home about, borrow one to from your co-religionists!

Silly people on the interwebz :)
 
Orthodox loyalties FTW. Amrite? If your country's air force is nothing to write home about, borrow one to from your co-religionists!

Silly people on the interwebz :)

I am sorry , I seem to have missed your point, care to make this as clear as if you were talking to a 6 year old?

---------- Post added at 07:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:10 PM ----------

right since we dont have much to go on we can only decide based on what is known and the more credible rumors, for instance, j-15 comes after J-11B and has tech from it, if J-11B is superior to the su-27, and the Su-33 is about on par with a SU-27 then we have no reason to think that J-15 is no better than a SU-33

The J-11B is claimed to be superior. We don't know that. and the Su-33 is not on par with the Su-27, there are differences.
But that is not the point. The point is that when we will start seeing more details about the chinese planes, copies or developed, we will know more. until then you should not get so upset when somebody points the obvious. That we simply don't know anything about the chinese planes one way or the other.
 
The J-11B is claimed to be superior. We don't know that. and the Su-33 is not on par with the Su-27, there are differences.
But that is not the point. The point is that when we will start seeing more details about the chinese planes, copies or developed, we will know more. until then you should not get so upset when somebody points the obvious. That we simply don't know anything about the chinese planes one way or the other.

well, the chinese fly both the su-27 and the j-11B, they could very very easily have made a bunch of j-11's but they stopped production of that way early and instead went and made the j-11B, thats one large hint that the j-11B is in fact better, that and the 20+ year gap in between the 2(overall 20 yrs behind the USA? maybe, 20 yrs behind Russia? unlikely)
and yes there are differences between the SU-33 and SU-27 i didn't say there weren't, however it is generally consider to be a navalized and only slightly improved variant of the original SU-27.

never got upset merely saying that this is all we can go on with the lack of official data, im just making my case for why i think the way i do. if we only went on facts and official statement(especially concerning the chinese military) then we would have must to talk about on these forums.
 
well, the chinese fly both the su-27 and the j-11B, they could very very easily have made a bunch of j-11's but they stopped production of that way early and instead went and made the j-11B, thats one large hint that the j-11B is in fact better, that and the 20+ year gap in between the 2(overall 20 yrs behind the USA? maybe, 20 yrs behind Russia? unlikely)
and yes there are differences between the SU-33 and SU-27 i didn't say there weren't, however it is generally consider to be a navalized and only slightly improved variant of the original SU-27.

never got upset merely saying that this is all we can go on with the lack of official data, im just making my case for why i think the way i do. if we only went on facts and official statement(especially concerning the chinese military) then we would have must to talk about on these forums.

The J-11 was plagued with the reasonable problems of a copy. So was to an extend the J-11B. In fact in a few behind the scenes conversations about the chinese copies of russian planes, a few american collegues were convinced the J-11B was an attempt first of all to mitigate and eliminate design and fabrication errors that resulted in an inferior J-11 as compared to the Su-27.

So at this stage in the west you must understand the belief is that the J-11B is a corrected plane ..not a better plane.
I believe (maybe in error) that he J-15 is something similar.

Now, why would China, carry one with the concurrent development of 3 different or even 4 first line planes.. you have to agree that is a question.

because if the J-20 is what is meant to be, then a navalised version is not too far fetched.
Then why the development of J-15 and the production of the J-11B ?

it is too expensive simply to fill the gaps until introduction of the J-20.. personal opinion only ofcourse ..
 
it's not fair to compare the two jets. J15 must be equiped with modern radar, etc...
Su33 was tested more and mature...
but i'm sure some people under-estimate j15.
whatever, Su27/33/35 and variants are very very good platform.
 
well as for india , they cant even take out Pakistan lol ,,, every Indian say they have double man power or what ever , every time Indian said we will go for war =)) , they didn't move a tank y know why cz they know after that no one can safe India from =))) Pakistan and your govermnt knows that and we were talking abt china lol y forgot Pakistan also used Chinese aircraft lol tested and worked pretty good in hands of bad boy's haii 14 against 114 lol =)) china had even builts its own stealth fighter , wht y have hal tejas or ( head and leg ) T JUICE AIRCRAFT LOL =))) GOO SHUT UP DUDE DO SOME RESCRH AND THEN SAY SOME THING LOL
 
The J-11 was plagued with the reasonable problems of a copy. So was to an extend the J-11B. In fact in a few behind the scenes conversations about the chinese copies of russian planes, a few american collegues were convinced the J-11B was an attempt first of all to mitigate and eliminate design and fabrication errors that resulted in an inferior J-11 as compared to the Su-27.

So at this stage in the west you must understand the belief is that the J-11B is a corrected plane ..not a better plane.
I believe (maybe in error) that he J-15 is something similar.

Now, why would China, carry one with the concurrent development of 3 different or even 4 first line planes.. you have to agree that is a question.

because if the J-20 is what is meant to be, then a navalised version is not too far fetched.
Then why the development of J-15 and the production of the J-11B ?

it is too expensive simply to fill the gaps until introduction of the J-20.. personal opinion only ofcourse ..



“The J-11 was plagued with the reasonable problems of a copy” ? Oh my…! J-11(A) is the licenced production - - meaning exactly the same, using all Russian components mind you. So what copy? Russians are copying Russians? :lol:

Su33 is a slightly improved navalised version of Su 27, with largely 20-year-old tech, agree?

J-15 is logically assumed a navalised version of J-11B, with up-to-date tech, agree?

Now if you still “think” that J-15 is inferior than Su33 (oke, apart from less “tested” with a glitch or two) , then you MUST also agree that F-16E/F today is inferior to original F-16A/B of the 90’s. Is that simple?

To be fair to you nonetheless, I should have thought that Greeks are not known for simple logical inferences as such. :lol:

Yeah, it is too expensive simply to fill the gaps… yet China has the silver. Expensive? What expensive? She just bailed out the EU this morning – 1 trillion Euro, which includes forgiving 50% of Greek national debt. Actually you own the Chinese here a Thankyou postcard to say the least.

.
 
“The J-11 was plagued with the reasonable problems of a copy” ? Oh my…! J-11(A) is the licenced production - - meaning exactly the same, using all Russian components mind you. So what copy? Russians are copying Russians? :lol:

Su33 is a slightly improved navalised version of Su 27, with largely 20-year-old tech, agree?

J-15 is logically assumed a navalised version of J-11B, with up-to-date tech, agree?

Now if you still “think” that J-15 is inferior than Su33 (oke, apart from less “tested” with a glitch or two) , then you MUST also agree that F-16E/F today is inferior to original F-16A/B of the 90’s. Is that simple?

To be fair to you nonetheless, I should have thought that Greeks are not known for simple logical inferences as such. :lol:

Yeah, it is too expensive simply to fill the gaps… yet China has the silver. Expensive? What expensive? She just bailed out the EU this morning – 1 trillion Euro, which includes forgiving 50% of Greek national debt. Actually you own the Chinese here a Thankyou postcard to say the least.

.

1st, of all the licenced copy doesn't mean it is not a copy, and fabrication processes in China and Russia where NOT the same resulting in problems with the quality of the J-11.
I mentioned that the J-11B by some is regarded as a corrected version, and an unlicenced at that. What did you not get?

second your whole F-16 argument is so wrong, I won't even go there.

and third .. your baillout point.. null and void and irrelevant as this is not the case. China was invited to partake in the funding.. hasn't done so yet and may not do it. The very deal is not finalized yet and you think China is already involved ? wow . and Greeks are not capable of things then.. . yes you are right clearly ...
 
1st, of all the licenced copy doesn't mean it is not a copy, and fabrication processes in China and Russia where NOT the same resulting in problems with the quality of the J-11.
I mentioned that the J-11B by some is regarded as a corrected version, and an unlicenced at that. What did you not get?

second your whole F-16 argument is so wrong, I won't even go there.

and third .. your baillout point.. null and void and irrelevant as this is not the case. China was invited to partake in the funding.. hasn't done so yet and may not do it. The very deal is not finalized yet and you think China is already involved ? wow . and Greeks are not capable of things then.. . yes you are right clearly ...

are you talking about some new Greek philosopies here`? so what is copy and what is licenced production? please inlight

and also all your assumptions are based on your limited knowledge of J-11B and J-15 and make it worse some so called 'facts' from some western 'sources'``can you even list one or two sources with clear cut definition of Su-33 and J-11B and J-15 capabilities?

no but you cannot, so then it has to come with common senses logics```saying 20 years old Su-33 is superior than J-15 with AESA, new avionics, weapons and engines (much reliable WS-10) is like saying F-14A is more advanced than F-35 as simple as that`
 
are you talking about some new Greek philosopies here`? so what is copy and what is licenced production? please inlight

and also all your assumptions are based on your limited knowledge of J-11B and J-15 and make it worse some so called 'facts' from some western 'sources'``can you even list one or two sources with clear cut definition of Su-33 and J-11B and J-15 capabilities?

no but you cannot, so then it has to come with common senses logics```saying 20 years old Su-33 is superior than J-15 with AESA, new avionics, weapons and engines (much reliable WS-10) is like saying F-14A is more advanced than F-35 as simple as that`


I don't have to.

your 20 year old argument holds no water. J-10s are brand new, yet I know for a fact they wouldn't survive 5 minutes in the air against F-16s blk 30. which are also 20 years old now.

if you cannot see how having a license does not mean your fabrication processes are also up to scratch then...
 
amalakas...Licensed Production is the term you need to understand China and hindustan is doing it. However there is a clause in many critical areas changes deemed necessary to the airframes and so on to introduce new design changes and technologies.

You maybe correct regarding correcting flaws in previous designs by russians, but infact correcting the flaws is in essence is introducing new designs and technologies. But you need to understand China is striving hard to shorten the gap in technologies thus introduction of complete Chinese avionics and sensors and weapons suite reflects J-11 variants have completely transformed into a new Airplane.

You have very limited knowledge of aviation, It is true F-16s are truly the historic plane in the skies holding the belt of a champion but I find it hard as how it wouldn't survive 5 minutes against F-16 block 30 since J-10A in itself is close to to block 42-50 in many critical areas the area where it is short is sensors, weapons and avionics. Obviously you need to go through J-10 thread yet to find out the plus points of J-10 against F-16 in dog fight they are both equally matched it would all come down to Pilots handling it and the air combat tactics.

PS. I would bet on a proven long timer champion but you never know a new comer can do to the champion J-10B.
 
1st, of all the licenced copy doesn't mean it is not a copy, and fabrication processes in China and Russia where NOT the same resulting in problems with the quality of the J-11.
I mentioned that the J-11B by some is regarded as a corrected version, and an unlicenced at that. What did you not get?

second your whole F-16 argument is so wrong, I won't even go there.

and third .. your baillout point.. null and void and irrelevant as this is not the case. China was invited to partake in the funding.. hasn't done so yet and may not do it. The very deal is not finalized yet and you think China is already involved ? wow . and Greeks are not capable of things then.. . yes you are right clearly ...

OK, let me break it down for you one by one :coffee: ---

There's no issue with J-11A here, copy or not I don't care, and you don't want to know. It's J-11B on the line of analysis here.

Apart from sharing a common airframe, J-11B and Su27 are two different breeds of animals for having drastically different "interiors"( avionics, elecs., materials, etc).

Now if you can't make a concret case , as you haven't yet, that 20-year-old Su 27 has "some areas" in its general airframe that are too advanced for the Chinese to "copy" 20 years later, making it overall a more capable plane than J-11B depite of its clearly inferior "interiors", then your whole logic falls apart. Thus you'll be forced to admit that by and large up-to-date J-11B is superior to Su-27, probably much superior still.

Granted that F-16E/F vs. F-16A/B was my lazy analogy, yet it's not far-fetched. Now take this -

- if amalakas01 is superior to Camel01, and
-if amalakas02 is much more superior to amalakas01, and
-if Camel 02 is slightly , if any, superior to Camel 01,

So, do you think amalakas02 is inferior to Camel02?

see, this is the beauty of inference, which doesn't require knowing exact details of things in order to get them right....let me know when you're ready so that I can grab my popcorn... but by all means take your time :lol:


As for the Euro deal, don't argue with me on finance, ever, as it's my cup of tea, oke? :smitten:

There's a thing called "funding", which the EU just can't solve by plugging in the printing press. China is the ONLY one on this planet to be able to fund the significant part of the deal so that it could go thru at the end of the day. Otherwise there is no realistic point to discuss the rescue deal in the first place if knowing that China won't be part of it beforehand, is it? Whatever spins the media may tell you to make you believe, the ultimate fate of Euro is in the hands of China now. Say Good Morning to your Chinese overlord.:wave:
 
Why we discussing a five month old thread?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom