Russia charges Chinese man with smuggling military equipment

[Akasa]

SinoSoldier,


Do you have trouble reading or something, where the F. U. C. K have i said in my post that the Yesen that is quieter than the Virgina, I said that the Yesen beats the Virgina when it comes to automation of systems you idiot.



pool of imagination-driven fantasy

:

pool of imagination-driven fantasy of Federation of American Scientists


Cakra 401 SubMarine: China’s Noisy Nuclear Submarines

pool of imagination-driven fantasy of U.S. Navy’s Office of Naval Intelligence

Great, since you are so "informed" on the classified matters of the Yasen and the Virigina, why don't you tell us the decibel levels of each submarine when at full power? Why not show us some sources for once?

And again, what are these "imagination-driven fantasies" before the actual submarine is even built? That's right: IMAGINATION-DRIVEN FANTASIES.

 

[peaceful]

It is just so funny to see Russians are still talking about their fancy Mig fighters.

The whole series are dead.
The entire company is dead.
You can't deny it.

 

[peaceful]

I hope Russia some day becomes part of NATO.... and work toward world peace already.....

getting tired of reading propaganda all the time from noobs in China and Pakistan who are not thinking outside the box.

better to mind your own 15 trillion USD debt problem.

let's be clear: your entire armed forces are built on borrowed money.

 

[Akasa]

1. Does not appeal to the names. Example for you Su-27K and Su-33.

2. Setting a different radio and light cosmetic changes. Properly be called an attempt to modernize.



1. I agree with you. S-11 and S-15 were going to hand the Chinese workers. With the help of Russian and drawings of the components.

2. The level of China's modern aircraft corresponds to the 80s + some improvements in electronic systems. For China, this is a great achievement.

When China launched its original model of the aircraft. Then stop and debate on this issue.

1. Stop trying to ignore the subject and face the facts. The Su-35BM and Su-33 use very similar airframe. However, the reason they are almost wholly different is because their internal technologies, avionics, etc, are different. The reason the J-11B and J-15 is not the Su-27 (or any Sukhoi aircraft) is because they use completely different internal technologies that put their capabilities much higher.

2. We are talking about a brain/muscle/organ transplant here, not some "cosmetic changes". The J-11B is essentially a completely new and different aircraft that is stuck inside an empty Su-27SK airframe. Everything else is completely different, new generation, and Chinese designed.



1. They studied a Su-33 prototype from Ukraine back in the 1980s, but it is unknown if anything were used. The J-11B and J-15 use completely new technologies compared to the Su-33. Only their airframe is similar.

2. No. The J-11B is almost on par with the Su-35BM. The J-20 is believed to have superior stealth and maneuverability than the T-50. The J-15 is comparable to the Rafale-M and Super Hornet. Do some analyzing and read some military official interviews. Don't rely on your fantasies and stereotypes here.

China launched its first original model of an aircraft in 1969, genius. It's called the Shenyang J-8.

 

[ptldM3]

An airframe is not an aircraft. I thought you would understand that.

An airframe is an aircraft, without the airfrane there would be no aircraft.

And since you ask, yes, the original J-11 was in fact built under license.

I know it was built under license, but that license or agreement was broken. How is it that China operates more J-11's than what the original contract permited them to built? Are you arguing that Shenyang is honest or that they have good bussiness ethics? These people refused to let a Sukhoi representative in the very factory that Sukhoi helped them esstablish, these are the same people that violated the terms of contract that outlined what systems they can intall, these are the same people that copied the SU-33.

 

[peaceful]

An airframe is an aircraft, without the airfrane there would be no aircraft.

which airframe is better? J-20 or T-50 junk?

just admit it, you know, be honest to yourself, it is not very hard to say "yes, we are now left behind, time to learn from Chinese J-20".

 

[ptldM3]

1. Stop trying to ignore the subject and face the facts. The Su-35BM and Su-33 use very similar airframe. .

They do not, internally they are redesined, the SU-35, and SU-33 have copletely different wings, and reinforced landing gears, one aircraft has canards while the other does not, and SU-33's can refuel eachother, which takes quite a bit of tinkering to the fuel tanks, bulkheads and fuel lines.

1. They studied a Su-33 prototype from Ukraine back in the 1980s, but it is unknown if anything were used. The J-11B and J-15 use completely new technologies compared to the Su-33. Only their airframe is similar..

They copied the entire airframe Even the folding wing lock mechanism is identical--coincidence?

2. No. The J-11B is almost on par with the Su-35BM. The J-20 is believed to have superior stealth and maneuverability than the T-50. The J-15 is comparable to the Rafale-M and Super Hornet. Do some analyzing and read some military official interviews. Don't rely on your fantasies and stereotypes here.

.

And who claimed this?

 

[ptldM3]

which airframe is better? J-20 or T-50 junk?

just admit it, you know, be honest to yourself, it is not very hard to say "yes, we are now left behind, time to learn from Chinese J-20".

Yes you are that is why you still have to import engines and other technology from us.

By the way some of the engineers that worked on the J-20 mighty dragqueen were Russian, ouch.

 

[Akasa]

An airframe is an aircraft, without the airfrane there would be no aircraft.

Then I guess, according to your statement, the Su-27 and the Su-35 are pretty much the "same aircraft", because hey, their airframe is very similar.
But that's not the case. The airframe is what we see, but as far as capability goes, the internal systems (avionics, engines, etc) matter.

I know it was built under license, but that license or agreement was broken. How is it that China operates more J-11's than what the original contract permited them to built? Are you arguing that Shenyang is honest or that they have good bussiness ethics? These people refused to let a Sukhoi representative in the very factory that Sukhoi helped them esstablish, these are the same people that violated the terms of contract that outlined what systems they can intall, these are the same people that copied the SU-33.

And why was the contract broken? Oh, because Russian workers said that the J-11B had veered too far from the original J-11. In other words, they know the J-11B is indigenous enough and they want to stop that from going into production.

Because once that does, poof, there goes your contract for the original J-11s and Su-27s.

 

[Akasa]

They do not, internally they are redesined, the SU-35, and SU-33 have copletely different wings, and reinforced landing gears, one aircraft has canards while the other does not, and SU-33's can refuel eachother, which takes quite a bit of tinkering to the fuel tanks, bulkheads and fuel lines.

And same thing with the J-11B and J-15. Their airframes were extensively modified.

The internal systems of the J-11B and J-15 are completely different and Chinese developed, which makes the aircraft pretty much Chinese. In a Russian style skin.

They copied the entire airframe Even the folding wing lock mechanism is identical--coincidence?

The addition of composites (saved 700 pounds of weight), modified intakes, and reduced RCS does not constitute "copying". Modernizing would be the right word.

And who claimed this?

Look with your eyes. We had this argument before.

 

[ptldM3]

Then I guess, according to your statement, the Su-27 and the Su-35 are pretty much the "same aircraft", because hey, their airframe is very similar.
But that's not the case. The airframe is what we see, but as far as capability goes, the internal systems (avionics, engines, etc) matter.

Airframe wise it is very similar, the SU-35 uses lighter and stronger alloys as well as more of them and there are some differences such as different tails but it does not deviate the way the SU-33 deviates from the original SU-27. As far as avionics of course they are different, but we are talking about 'airframes'.

And why was the contract broken? Oh, because Russian workers said that the J-11B had veered too far from the original J-11. In other words, they know the J-11B is indigenous enough and they want to stop that from going into production.

Because once that does, poof, there goes your contract for the original J-11s and Su-27s.

Too far from the original? It was supposed to use all Russian systems but China broke that contract after they got their hands on Russian avionics that they either copied or improved over time. As for the the J-11B or any other Flanker varient it did not matter how indigenous it was since the contract was already broken what mattered was royalties. Sukhoi did not and does not want unauthorized Flankers rolling of the same production lines they they helped establish. In other words if China stop the contract at 95 than they have no right to continue building more flankers.

 

[ptldM3]

And same thing with the J-11B and J-15. Their airframes were extensively modified.

The internal systems of the J-11B and J-15 are completely different and Chinese developed, which makes the aircraft pretty much Chinese. In a Russian style skin.

Feeding lighter alloys through CNC machines doesn't mean it's a different airframe or that it gives China the right to produce unauthorized airframe. Suppose China let a country produce the J-10 and said country started violating numerous parts of the contract, eventually said country told China that their aircraft is not a J-10 because they use different alloys. I'm sure your mind would change very quickly.

Look with your eyes. We had this argument before.

So How is the J-20 more maneuverable and why? Do you think that because they stuck a pair of canards on such a large aircraft that it will be more maneuverable than the pak-fa? What do canards do? They give an aircraft a higher AoA, as does so LERX. Does the J-20 have TVC engines and does it have a higher T/W ration? What about wing loading, this is very important for sustained turns, does your J-20 have a high wing loading? What about turn rate, the pak-fa has widely spaced engine coupled with TVC, once the TVC is activated this will allow the pak-fa to have a very high role rate. What about FBW systems.

And just what do you mean by more maneuverable? higher rate of climb, higher turn rate, higher role rate, what exactly are you talking about. Stop using phrases such as it is believed when in fact you and a couple of die hard J-20 fanboys believe the J-20 to be more maneuverable based on nothing more than the belief that canards will somehow make it more maneuverable.

And I do look from my eyes, I see plenty of video's with the pak-fa performing high G terns, but I can not say the same for the J-20.

 

[peaceful]

Yes you are that is why you still have to import engines and other technology from us.

By the way some of the engineers that worked on the J-20 mighty dragqueen were Russian, ouch.

stupid argument.

There are Chinese scientists and engineers working for NASA.
Chinese professors can be found in every single US universities.

this is called international cooperation, this is what people do when they don't drink vodka.

(btw: I really enjoy vodka, so when I say it, it doesn't mean I consider you as drunk, it is really the best contrubition of your nation made to mankind).

 

[Project 627]

Great, since you are so "informed" on the classified matters of the Yasen and the Virigina, why don't you tell us the decibel levels of each submarine when at full power? Why not show us some sources for once?

And again, what are these "imagination-driven fantasies" before the actual submarine is even built? That's right: IMAGINATION-DRIVEN FANTASIES.

Buddy, your the one who is living in imagination-driven fantasies I have given you multiple links with important sources of information on the Type 95, but all you given me is empty talk. If you don't believe the sources, then its not my F u c king problem .

 

[Project 627]

It is just so funny to see Russians are still talking about their fancy Mig fighters.

The whole series are dead.
The entire company is dead.
You can't deny it.

The MiG company is very much alive you brain dead idiot, and also working on their next projects.

Mikoyan LMFS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MiG Skat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia