Chinese junk? Latest fighter plane from People's Army ticketed for exp

[Zarvan]

A new fighter plane built by China is drawing more snickers than raves from aviation experts, and the People's Army is now saying the jet was really ticketed for export all along.

The J-31 "Falcon Hawk," likely designed by reverse-engineering a downed U.S. stealth fighter, was supposed “to become China’s next generation of carrier-based aircraft” and take its place next to the U.S.-made F-35 Lightning II as the gold standard in air force weaponry, according to a report last month in People’s Daily. But now it looks like China, which has exactly one aircraft carrier, has scaled back the hype and will peddle the aircraft to second-tier air forces like Brazil, Pakistan and some Middle East countries.

“It’s probably likely that the technology was not originally created for export but built for their own use and it did not work out too well,” Stephen Biddle, a political science professor at George Washington University and senior defense policy fellow at the Council for Foreign Relations told FoxNews.com.

“It’s probably likely that the technology was not originally created for export but built for their own use and it did not work out too well.”
- Stephen Biddle, Senior Defense Policy Fellow, Council for Foreign Relations

Even the Chinese press has been critical of the jet, with Bejing-based Sina Military Network calling the J-15 a “flopping fish,” and claiming that the plane could not take off from a carrier with heavy ammunitions which could cripple its attack range as well as firepower.

Aviation experts say that based on the limited information publicly available of the J-31, it appears to be little more than a cheap copy of an American fighter jet.

"The J-31 is sort of a copy of the F-22, the most advanced (and troubled), U.S. multi-role fighter jet," David Cenciotti, a former pilot for the Italian Air Force who blogs at theaviationist.com, told FoxNews.com. "Same nose section, same twin tails and trapezoidal wings along with the distinctive lines of the stealth design."

But Cenciotti said the aircraft doesn’t appear to have thrust vectoring capabilities that give fighter planes superior maneuverability. He suspects it was based on American warplanes, and not just the F-117 stealth jet downed in 1999 by a Serbian anti-aircraft missile.

"Considering all the cyber attacks targeting Lockheed Martin stealth projects in the last years, one could believe Chinese hackers were able to put their hands on some useful technical drawings of the Raptor or F-35," he said.

No amount of espionage or copying of U.S. technology can duplicate American air power, according to Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Il.) an Air Force veteran who still serves as a pilot in the Air National Guard.

“America has always produced and flown the top aviation machines in the world," Kinzinger told FoxNews.com. "While China’s claims about the capabilities of the J-31 have raised some eyebrows, consider me a skeptic until I see the proof.”

James Hardy, Asia-Pacific Editor of Jane’s Defence Weekly, said there is no way to compare the J-31 to other fighter planes, given the secrecy still surrounding it.

“Because we have only limited data on the J-31, it impossible to say whether it is inferior to the F-35,” Hardy said. "Qualitatively there's no way to compare unless we know its fire-control radar, subsystems, avionics, and what it is made of. Its planform [silhouette] certainly makes it look like a fifth generation fighter, but what materials it is made of and all kinds of other questions mean judging its radar cross section - and so its stealthiness - is hard to do.”

Hardy adds that lack of strong information about the fighter --and the fact that it is going straight to export--might make it a hard sell on the international market.

“One key point is that if the People's Liberation Army air forces aren’t going to field it, that might deter other countries," he said. "The thinking may go: if it's not good enough for China, why should we buy it?”
Chinese junk? Latest fighter plane from People's Army ticketed for export | Fox News @Aeronaut @Oscar @nuclearpak @Icarus @Xeric @Arabian Legend @Yzd Khalifa @DESERT FIGHTER @jaibi @balixd and others

 

[S10]

What's this article? It's all over the place. First you got a political science (most useless degree btw) professor talking about technical aspect of J-31. Then you jumped to some third rate media in China (Sina is like Fox News, except even less professional) about J-15. Finally you got some clueless Italian pilot commenting on things he has little idea about.

"sort of a copy of F-22"? Seriously? In that case, every plane is sort of a copy of Wright Brother's original design, since they all have wings and tails.

 

[gambit]

What's this article? It's all over the place. First you got a political science (most useless degree btw) professor talking about technical aspect of J-31. Then you jumped to some third rate media in China (Sina is like Fox News, except even less professional) about J-15. Finally you got some clueless Italian pilot commenting on things he has little idea about.

"sort of a copy of F-22"? Seriously? In that case, every plane is sort of a copy of Wright Brother's original design, since they all have wings and tails.

You guys have no problems making comments about the technical aspects of the US F-22 and F-35, at least half of the declarations defies the laws of physics, so why the offense that someone is doing the same to the Chinese aircrafts?

 

[S10]

You guys have no problems making comments about the technical aspects of the US F-22 and F-35, at least half of the declarations defies the laws of physics, so why the offense that someone is doing the same to the Chinese aircrafts?

Do show me such comments that I made. Please, I like to see them too.

 

[Genesis]

You guys have no problems making comments about the technical aspects of the US F-22 and F-35, at least half of the declarations defies the laws of physics, so why the offense that someone is doing the same to the Chinese aircrafts?

First the US is the leader in this field, no matter who says what, the US will remain there for the foreseeable future.

China is already given a hard time for our efforts, which is expected, but there's a lot of wrong information going around. For example, people say China copies Russian fighters, but they failed to mention, most of China's "copies" are based on the licensed production fighter Su-27, aka J-11. They later became J-11b, J-15 and J-16 as well as a few more variants.

The original J-11 is a licensed legal production that was halted because by the time the number reached 100, the J-11 was seen as a fighter behind the times, hence the research and production of the later variants. They are based on the original J-11, yes, but the Russians had no equivalent, not really, since the tech used on it are purely Chinese, and because if we used Russian tech, we be behind before the fighter even rolls out.


So, while people would believe the US fighters to be great, a great Chinese fighter will not be judged as kindly. Hence why we defend it more so than you do of the American fighters.



But seriously are we seriously taking tech advice from the news network that thinks evolution is a fairytale, global warming is a joke and Obama is the second coming of Hitler?

 

[gambit]

Do show me such comments that I made. Please, I like to see them too.

It is not YOU, personally. It is you guys as a group. And please do not tell me that is not true. It is not that difficult to find the Chinese 'commentaries' about the F-22 and F-35. Most of them hilarious.

 

[S10]

It is not YOU, personally. It is you guys as a group. And please do not tell me that is not true. It is not that difficult to find the Chinese 'commentaries' about the F-22 and F-35. Most of them hilarious.

So you are attributing comments that others have made and grouped myself into it. I suppose I should hold you responsible for every retarded comments made by Americans or Vietnamese? Those are quite hilarious too. Logical fallacy much?

 

[gambit]

China is already given a hard time for our efforts, which is expected, but there's a lot of wrong information going around. For example, people say China copies Russian fighters, but they failed to mention, most of China's "copies" are based on the licensed production fighter Su-27, aka J-11. They later became J-11b, J-15 and J-16 as well as a few more variants.

The original J-11 is a licensed legal production that was halted because by the time the number reached 100, the J-11 was seen as a fighter behind the times, hence the research and production of the later variants. They are based on the original J-11, yes, but the Russians had no equivalent, not really, since the tech used on it are purely Chinese, and because if we used Russian tech, we be behind before the fighter even rolls out.

They are copies.

This is not about whether China manufactures them under license or not. The word 'copy' here is meant to say that China produced a product, without contribution to the overall field, by basing this product from a foreign source and from previous accomplishments. There is nothing wrong with that. But have the intellectual honesty to acknowledge that the Chinese variants have contributed nothing to aviation.

But seriously are we seriously taking tech advice from the news network that thinks evolution is a fairytale, global warming is a joke and Obama is the second coming of Hitler?

Ridiculing Fox News will get you nowhere, especially when the article cited other sources. And it is those sources that should be the focus of your rebuttals.

So you are attributing comments that others have made and grouped myself into it. I suppose I should hold you responsible for every retarded comments made by Americans or Vietnamese? Those are quite hilarious too. Logical fallacy much?

Beats me...You guys already have...

 

[Genesis]

They are copies.

This is not about whether China manufactures them under license or not. The word 'copy' here is meant to say that China produced a product, without contribution to the overall field, by basing this product from a foreign source and from previous accomplishments. There is nothing wrong with that. But have the intellectual honesty to acknowledge that the Chinese variants have contributed nothing to aviation.


Ridiculing Fox News will get you nowhere, especially when the article cited other sources. And it is those sources that should be the focus of your rebuttals.


Beats me...You guys already have...

No Chinese General has ever said Chinese fighters made revolutionary changes, but the tone of some people make it seem like we took a Russian fighter took it apart and then built our own, which is not the truth.

For Example the J-15 is Su-33 like, but that's because the Su-33 is also a flanker variant. It both came from the same design. But everything else about the J-15 is more advanced than the Su-33. It is only a "copy" in the sense it was based on the same fighter, but it uses different engine, radar, material, and pretty much everything about it is different, other than the original flanker shape, which all variants are close.


I said fox news is untrustworthy, they are a "patriotic" news source, they target a specific audience and saying China is doing ok, is like poison.

I never said they are not a huge company, they can pretty much make anyone say anything, within their sphere.

However the sources they provided are really not the authority on pretty much anything Chinese. For example, at this point the J-31 is top secret, nobody outside knows anything, how did a professor know?

All he had to base his accusations are a few reports by people who are even less qualified.

 

[gambit]

No Chinese General has ever said Chinese fighters made revolutionary changes, but the tone of some people make it seem like we took a Russian fighter took it apart and then built our own, which is not the truth.

For Example the J-15 is Su-33 like, but that's because the Su-33 is also a flanker variant. It both came from the same design. But everything else about the J-15 is more advanced than the Su-33. It is only a "copy" in the sense it was based on the same fighter, but it uses different engine, radar, material, and pretty much everything about it is different, other than the original flanker shape, which all variants are close.

It IS the truth.

The F-16 have engines from Pratt-Whitney and General Electric. Does that mean there are two different -16s?

I said fox news is untrustworthy,...

I do not care of your opinion of Fox News. But the reality is that Fox News is better than rt and presstv and people got no problems using the latter two as 'credible' news sources.

However the sources they provided are really not the authority on pretty much anything Chinese. For example, at this point the J-31 is top secret, nobody outside knows anything, how did a professor know?

All he had to base his accusations are a few reports by people who are even less qualified.

If the F-35 is open to analyses by the Australians (APA), of whom the leader have no aviation experience, and people have no problems using APA as a source to make outrageous claims about the J-20, especially by your friend Marty, then why not the J-31 be equally open to analyses by us lay people?

Let me guess...American products are fair game, but not Chinese?

 

[Genesis]

It IS the truth.

The F-16 have engines from Pratt-Whitney and General Electric. Does that mean there are two different -16s?


I do not care of your opinion of Fox News. But the reality is that Fox News is better than rt and presstv and people got no problems using the latter two as 'credible' news sources.


If the F-35 is open to analyses by the Australians (APA), of whom the leader have no aviation experience, and people have no problems using APA as a source to make outrageous claims about the J-20, especially by your friend Marty, then why not the J-31 be equally open to analyses by us lay people?

Let me guess...American products are fair game, but not Chinese?

It's not just copy, according to the manufacturer, over 90% has been changed and built in China. Would you say F-15 silent eagle is a copy of the F-15 original?

It's based on it, but it's also much improved. But some members like to quote sources that talks like the J-15 is a complete copy of the Russian's Su-33 which is not the case at all. Especially since our access to a Su-33 is not readily available.

Now there's claim we copied the F-35, and F-22, be nice if we could, but I don't think the Americans are so stupid as to let their top secret programs fall into Chinese hands. Without these and the American engineers how can we copy?




I never used RT, or presstv, as sources and what other people do is their business. Eating lead will kill you, eating grass won't, but that doesn't make it a good for you. RT's trustworthiness is not relevant to how trustworthy fox news is. Nobody ever says because Philippines has less per capita than China, so China is now first world. There's a clear standard, and regardless of what RT did, Fox is still below standard.



You been saying again and again how those people are wrong, but here you are defending them. Well, maybe not defend, but using them to make this seem "true." If you want to be one of those members that would believe American stealth fade in the rain or Chinese planes explode mid air then it's up to you, but if you are not then don't bring up what others are doing to this discussion.

I have said that the article is not true, I didn't say you can't say Chinese stuff are not up to standard. I have said the J-15 can't be used effectively or even at all at this point with the Liaoning. It's not like I been going around and saying all Chinese tech is a gift from god.

 

[gambit]

It's not just copy, according to the manufacturer, over 90% has been changed and built in China. Would you say F-15 silent eagle is a copy of the F-15 original?

It's based on it, but it's also much improved.

Yes...I would.

The SE is indeed a variant, but STRUCTURALLY speaking, the only difference between the SE and its predecessors are the canted twin vertical stabs. Conformal store containers are not part of the original design and can be removed without adversely affecting its original flight dynamics. That fact is obvious enough with the original conformal fuel tanks configuration and those conformal containers were indeed removable. All Boeing did were external modifications, not design improvements.

But some members like to quote sources that talks like the J-15 is a complete copy of the Russian's Su-33 which is not the case at all. Especially since our access to a Su-33 is not readily available.

Putting a different cockpit layout does not make the J-15 a different beast. Even if you go as far as installing a different engine in it, that still would not be enough. You want to see a genuine difference despite visual similarities? Try the A-5, MIG-25, and F-15.

Most people falsely believe that the F-15 was based upon the MIG-25 out of that visual similarity. The reality is that the MIG-25 was based upon the North American A-5 Vigilante. The A-5's final production run have a single vertical stab. But the original design had twin vertical stabs. The US Navy decided the twin tails were too 'radical' for its pilots so would not purchase it unless North American changed the design. Look at the MIG-25 and you would see the original A-5 and espionage helped produced the MIG-25. The F-15 is an evolution from the A-5, not the MIG-25.

At best...The Chinese version of the Soviet/Russian fighters is analogous to how the MIG-25 came to be.

Now there's claim we copied the F-35, and F-22, be nice if we could, but I don't think the Americans are so stupid as to let their top secret programs fall into Chinese hands. Without these and the American engineers how can we copy?

The word 'copy' here is meant to denote the Chinese engineers copied as much as possible some of the visual aspects of the F-22 onto the J-31. Sorry, but that is undeniable. That does not mean the J-31 is somehow 'based' upon the F-22. It means that out of the need to quickly produce a supposedly 'stealth' aircraft, Chinese engineers simply incorporated as much as possible the many structural and shaping features of the F-22 to make the J-31 and hope that visual similarities will produce comparable radar reflectivity.

I never used RT, or presstv, as sources and what other people do is their business. Eating lead will kill you, eating grass won't, but that doesn't make it a good for you. RT's trustworthiness is not relevant to how trustworthy fox news is. Nobody ever says because Philippines has less per capita than China, so China is now first world. There's a clear standard, and regardless of what RT did, Fox is still below standard.

You been saying again and again how those people are wrong, but here you are defending them. Well, maybe not defend, but using them to make this seem "true." If you want to be one of those members that would believe American stealth fade in the rain or Chinese planes explode mid air then it's up to you, but if you are not then don't bring up what others are doing to this discussion.

Sure it is simply because the same people who criticize Fox often referenced rt or presstv at their convenience. I point that out not because am trying to lump you into that group but only to bring to the fore the need to focus on the CONTENTS of these sources, even more so when they reference someone else.

I have said that the article is not true, I didn't say you can't say Chinese stuff are not up to standard. I have said the J-15 can't be used effectively or even at all at this point with the Liaoning. It's not like I been going around and saying all Chinese tech is a gift from god.

If you say that the article is 'not true', the you have to do something like prove the Italian pilot David Cenciotti is a fictional character. But since he is a real person and assume that he did made that comment, then you cannot say that the article is 'not true' even if Cenciotti is proven technically wrong at a later date.

 

[xunzi]

One of the most useless article I ever read. How do you write a piece of factual article when you have limited information on this top secret? Anyone with a half a brain knows that nothing is conclusive about the J-31. We simply don't know what is currently on the PLAAF's mind.

In my opinion, as I posted an article earlier from a Chinese aviation expert in the field, that there would be two version of J-31, one for domestic use and one for export. The domestic use will employ sensitive advance technology while the export version will equip with less advance to lower the cost for interest partners.

 

[vK_man]

Fox news is known for writing BS. Even most americans don't take it seriously with exception of neo-cons.

 

[[Bregs]]

This article is full of myths and half truths