I disagree.
First of all a system build upon a tested and credible platform, however not time tested, can be deemed more fit than a completely new design. For e.g F 22 can be safely expected to be better than J20 even though neither has seen any war because US has build its system on already time tested technology in F-16, 15 and 18.
Secondly I agree that new systems, chinese or whatever, goes through extensive testing but the test cases differs for those who never saw real war and those who saw them closely and knows the very tiny details of it. Chinese equipment lacks here because they dont have extensive war library to give them a holistic view of warfare. Its just a difference between theoretical and practical difference. They might be upto theoretical standards but there are high chances they miss the practical nuances.
Interesting.... First off I dont like to comment on specific capability to without knowing about it, the assumption here is chinese testing protocol is as competent as any others. When I say testing, I mean subsystems and the standards for there testing.... Chinese systems mostly are based off western and russian technology or sometimes some of which combines the best of both the worlds, the best example is KLJ7/10 radar, they are based off Zhuk emr system but is a step ahead in terms of resolution, noise cancelletion.
Now to your first point, that technolgy that is time tested on the f teen series will be a given for f22 has some flaws, because f22 doesn't share any common systems with the aforementioned jets, but I do get the essence of your posts. Combat experience that it is built upon does help, but it is not a game changer and thus every airforce around the world hold drills and exercises for combat system evaluations. going by the same argument, how is sweedish gripen any better, it has never seen any combat either...
I come back to testing, most modern combat aircrafts will go fatigue testing of entire wing structure for a million cycles in edge wise and flapwise configs, a mig 21 went through less than 1/3rd of it. Thus as the aircrafts structures, materials and technology evolves, the testing process keeps up with it.... and what the piers of these aircraft went through doesn't validate anything in todays world, where everything has become stronger faster and more smarter...
war library and holistic war database you refer to, in todays world is not something that really dictates anything. Todays war's are fought on basis of the technolgy, because those days have gone when technology had to keep up with combat, today combat has to keep up with technology. Today, you need to be one step ahead of your adversaries technology which you do not want to find in combat, you want to account for it and develop counters for it beforehand.
If anything I believe the limited deployment of chinese aircrafts make them enigmatic adversaries, their flight characteristics, their weaponry details are all speculative, that makes them very dangerous and calls for additional safeguards....
Hi,
F22 is a bad example-----please remember---with the americans---what you see may be 10--20 years old or in progression for the longest time. Any front line american weapons system is time tested and put thru its paces like it was thru real battle scenarios.
As for the chinese equipment---they have not had a chance to test them in any real battles---. For the americans---it is the cold war readiness---it is the gulf war---it is the vietnam war---it is the world wars---years and years of war games with all the known powers of the world---testing each and every item a thousands times over---.
And the most important thing of all---the western equipment is weather tested. Most of you won't understand it what it means----but the weather test is the most important test of any weapons system and equioment.
Any top notch top rated weapons system is also a time tested weapons system---. The weather---the changing temperatures---rain, snow sunshine cold heat freeze---freezing thawing roller coaster weather climate and temperature changes---which single chinese system falls in that category!
Do you think there are pass fail criterions for chinese weaponry?
How do they differ from american, french or russian standards of testing?
How does anyone deem one all aspect missile and the seeker better than the other without access to both of the original test reports?
what is A+ and B+ according to you and how did you determine these grades?