French indigenous technology is highly questionable

[Martian2]

Because the civilian Russian population buys and consumes Chinese goods does not mean China feels presure to purchase military goods from Russia, military goods that it may not even receive. If it does than that's just obsurdly funny.

Even though i think your claim is crazy i would still appreciate if you copied and pasted the paragraph which stated the said claim.

I will provide you with a firsthand account that China buys some Russian technology for political and not economic reasons.

Years ago, I was involved in the export of a refurbished CMOS production line for $6.2 million U.S. dollars from the American supplier COMDISCO in Rosemont Illinois to COERI (i.e Chongqing OptoElectronic Research Institute #44). The American facility inspector Mr. Consolini, on site at COERI, wanted to know why a Russian fabrication line was being installed.

He was puzzled because COERI had just bought a technologically far superior American Complementary Metal-Oxide Semiconductor production line. The head of COERI, Director Yang, replied that the Russian production line was bought for political reasons.

The subcontractors, located in California, that refurbished the American semiconductor equipment were TES/ERI, California Plastics, and a few other firms that I've forgotten. The packaging company was Pacific Packaging.

 

[Martian2]

For those of you that are interested, Armand kept making excuses for the French military. It was sad to see how many excuses that a French could make. He seemed deep in denial.

Anyway, Armand couldn't figure out an answer to a question (see below) that I posed to him. Armand called in an anti-China Indian-moderator buddy to insist on no off-topic discussion. A typical French weenie.

If the French military is as advanced as you claim, can you show me a picture of an advanced French Aegis-class destroyer with distinctive phased-array panels?


China's Type 052C Aegis-class destroyer #171 Haikou

U.S. Arleigh Burke Aegis-class destroyer

 

[gambit]

Since you brought up Vietnam, let's take a look at the French military's performance at the famous battle of Dien Bien Phu.

Dien Bien Phu

"Dien Bien Phu was a crushing defeat for the French. Dien Bien Phu was a military and psychological defeat for the French in Vietnam."

Hold on a minute...No one is fond of French colonialism in Indochina but every military historian considered French military performance at Dien Bien Phu to be superior to the Viet Minh. The siege lasted months despite the Viet Minh's superiority in manpower, artillery and high ground position. Giap suffered so much casualties in the first half of the siege that he finally told his Chinese advisors 'FU' and resort to the only type of combat he knew best -- guerrilla warfare -- and eventually he wore the French down by attrition. Giap could have decimated the fort with his artillery alone but his failure to exploit his superior high ground with his artillery is textbook lesson for all artillery officers. Dien Bien Phu is totally inappropriate to this discussion.

 

[SinoIndusFriendship]

The biased Indian moderators in the other forum started deleting my posts. I transferred my posts over here in a hurry (due to the luck of having multiple browsers open). It's a good place for storage because the moderators here aren't biased. Also, the thread looks interesting and many members have found it entertaining (e.g. look at comments in thread).

If it makes you feel better, just pretend I started a new thread on "French indigenous technology is highly questionable."

That's nothing to be surprised about. It's in the nature of those envious Indian moderators to "censor" anything that challenges their egos.


But here's a word of advice. I don't know if you are a graduate student (MSC or PhD), but you invest too much of your time fighting internet trolls. Hope you spend your time and smarts on something that gives you (and us) more tangible results. It's not that your articles aren't educational -- they are, but always keep in mind "opportunity cost":

How can I spend my efforts to achieve the maximum positive benefits???

 

[Martian2]

That's nothing to be surprised about. It's in the nature of those envious Indian moderators to "censor" anything that challenges their egos.


But here's a word of advice. I don't know if you are a graduate student (MSC or PhD), but you invest too much of your time fighting internet trolls. Hope you spend your time and smarts on something that gives you (and us) more tangible results. It's not that your articles aren't educational -- they are, but always keep in mind "opportunity cost":

How can I spend my efforts to achieve the maximum positive benefits???

I greatly appreciate your advice. You are correct. I am living on borrowed time on the Internet. I will take a long break soon due to scholastic demands. By the way, you are very astute. I am joining the health care field. My chances are pretty good (e.g. 98% verbal and 99% math SAT and 3.99 college GPA). Wish me luck, SinoIndusFriendship!

 

[noksss]

There is a unbalanced trade between China and Russia. Today, China only buys natural resources from Russia, unlike decade ago China now has no major dependence on Russian military technology and weaponry purchase. On the other hand, Russia's market has became one of the haven of China's export goods. So China has to buy some of the Russian products to offset this unbalanced trade. For the same reason, China has bought S-300 with already being capable to build the comparable HQ-9.

So are u saying a mere $267 million deal for RD-33 engine will favour the trade to russia i highly appriciate ur knowldege on trading happening between countries and for the question of China not dependent on russia

see the link:http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-defence/45356-chinas-military-modernization-russian-factor.html

 

[below_freezing]

Dont talk about something which is going to happen in the future
lets have a discussion about J-xx later talk something which is already in use French engineers has delivered the engine for Rafael bu ur chinese engineers have not done that for JF-17 and can u explain me what is the political reason for importing an engine from russia

do you know that the rafale's TURBOFAN engines produce only a tiny bit more thrust than the J-8's TURBOJET engines from 1980's?

Dassault Rafale - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Powerplant: 2× Snecma M88-2 turbofans
Dry thrust: 50.04 kN (11,250 lbf) each
Thrust with afterburner: 75.62 kN with M88-Eco >90 kN after 2010 (17,000 lbf) each

Shenyang J-8 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Powerplant: 2× WP-13A-II turbojets
Dry thrust: 42.7 kN (9,900 lbf) each
Thrust with afterburner: 65.9 kN [9] [10] (14,815 lbf) each

Xian JH-7 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Powerplant: 2× Xian WS9 (a license-built Spey Mk202) afterburning turbofans
Dry thrust: 54.29 kN (12,250 lbf) each
Thrust with afterburner: 91.26 kN (20,515 lbf) each

and it pales compared to even the WS-9 (made in 1980's too)

yes, they are delivering engines, that are inferior to 1980's technology.

 

[gambit]

do you know that the rafale's TURBOFAN engines produce only a tiny bit more thrust than the J-8's TURBOJET engines from 1980's?

Before you ask this question, you should do some research on the differences between the turbojet and turbofan engines. Differences naturally produces advantages and disadvantages, which in turn make one type more suitable to some applications than the other type. Thrust is only one factor in selection, either to buy or to manufacture. To start, the turbojet is the simplest to manufacture, but why is the majority of applications, from commercial to military, uses turbofan?

 

[below_freezing]

fuel efficiency.

again, the J-8 is a plane that's in the league of F-4 phantoms, from 1970's/80's era. the fact that rafale's engines produce less thrust, one of the most basic parameters for air combat, shows how backwards french engineering is.

if we were to compare turbofans, the WS-9 built in the 80's is still superior to the french engine.

 

[gambit]

fuel efficiency.

again, the J-8 is a plane that's in the league of F-4 phantoms, from 1970's/80's era. the fact that rafale's engines produce less thrust, one of the most basic parameters for air combat, shows how backwards french engineering is.

if we were to compare turbofans, the WS-9 built in the 80's is still superior to the french engine.

This shows that you have not done your assigned homework. Epic fail.

 

[Martian2]

The following video has been watched by 1,613,401 viewers.

The description in the first five seconds of the video is:

"French-Canadian Infantry firing a French made Eryx Anti-Tank Missile. This is a very impressive demonstration of French technology."

YouTube - French ERYX Misfire