Russia charges Chinese man with smuggling military equipment

[HROBOS]

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.

Stop.

1. Your skin is the concept of "plane". If we consider the matter seriously. The skin for the aircraft is covering his paint. The airframe is the skeleton of the aircraft. The airframe is a complex structure. He meets many requirements (aerodynamics, durability, reliability, etc.).
Each aircraft has an individual hull design (or a different appearance).
For example, if we compare the appearance of two aircraft (Su -27, and F-15). Despite some similarities (you will immediately distinguish one from another plane). They are a completely different design. These jets create different aviation schools. These aircraft have a different philosophy. You will not find any similar items.

2. Why China is using the airframe and engines of the Russian aircraft. Because the Chinese aircraft manufacturers are engaged in it from the beginning (the birth of the aviation industry in China). Since the beginning of the MiG is now Su-27/33. The main occupation of the Chinese designers is not the development of new designs. The main task of the Chinese designers is recycling other people's projects.

Processing has two stages.

1. To adapt the model for the possibility of Chinese industry. If the Chinese industry is not technically possible to create what - what part of the aircraft. Chinese designers are trying to find an alternative to them (in the best of my ability).

2. Trying to upgrade. Modernization is basically an attempt to introduce new elements. As a design, and foreign copies.



1. You claim that within plane has changed.
I do not contradict this. Like I said, Chinese engineers are trying to replace some items. This work is in the world is called modernization. In China it is the main occupation.

2. You can not use "alien" airframe / aircraft design to build a new plane.
It just makes no sense. Each airframe has its well-defined size, weight, volume (which depends on the capabilities of the engine and internal equipment). As there are two similar fingerprints, so no two are identical to the case of aircraft. Chinese engineers can not change the body the Su-27. Because they still can not independently develop some systems ..
I repeat once more. China is engaged in illegal copying and licensing (of dubious quality) changes in the original draft of the Su-27.

 

[peaceful]

I repeat once more. China is engaged in illegal copying and licensing (of dubious quality) changes in the original draft of the Su-27.

Dude, how dare you talk about the quality and performance of Su-27sk?
Chinese were all shocked by its poor performance. That is why they had to upgrade it to J-11B.

it is also funny to see Russians talk about quality and performance. Read the following, it is from your army chielf.

Russian arms lag behind NATO and China’s weaponry – army chief

The top commander of Russia's ground forces claimed that domestically produced weapons are inferior to those used by Chinese and NATO troops.
General Colonel Aleksandr Postnikov expressed his opinion on March 15 during a defense and security meeting.
“Take Russia’s armored force, its artillery or small arms – they all fail to comply with modern NATO and even China’s arms,” Postnikov said.
As an example, he cited the new Russian battle tank T-90, which has been widely marketed all over the world.
“This tank is nothing more than a 17th modification of the Soviet T-72,” Postnikov declared. “And it costs a whopping $4 million per unit to manufacture! We could have bought three German ‘Leopards’ for the same amount of money.”

Russian arms lag behind NATO and China

 

[peaceful]

the most funny thing on earth is to listen Russians to teach Chinese about weapon quality --- when their army chief openly admitted that Russia weapons are not on par with Chinese.

time to wake up, you didn't come up with anything exciting in the past 20 years.

 

[Zabaniyah]

After some surfing on the net, I conclude that the J-11B specifically is an illegal modification of the SU-27 air frame as per agreements with Sukhoi.

There is such a thing called intellectual property rights in the defense world. US ToT to NATO countries for example are very clear and strict about intellectual rights.

Sure, the avionics are completely different and indigenous from the Russian variant, but the air frame is still of Russian origin, not Chinese. Might help ease the row between Beijing and Moscow if the former pays the proper royalty fees or something like that

I suppose that China also carries out flagrant intellectual property violations as far as the Americans go.

Hell, even the Japanese.

Ngee Khiong: Bandai's Legal Action Against Pirated Gunpla Manufacturer & Seller in China

This is not criticism. Just an observation

 

[Mo12]

Do people in Russia consider China to be a ally?

I dont know why Russia is in the SCO, when China steals Russia tech and know how.

 

[Zabaniyah]

Do people in Russia consider China to be a ally?

I dont know why Russia is in the SCO, when China steals Russia tech and know how.

They have had more serious issues in the past than intellectual property violations!

The SCO in my opinion is a necessary body so that the respective nation's interests are addressed. I hope they don't destroy it's credibility like in SAARC with constant back-stabbing

 

[HROBOS]

Dude, how dare you talk about the quality and performance of Su-27sk?


Who are you? And why dare raise a voice in my direction?
You do not leave the same problems that plagued last night? Sorry, nothing I can do to help you.
You need to find someone with a medical degree, my degree will not help you.
Tough? Yes. But you're already bored (distribute their teenage delusion).
Russia is not a tool for raising your self-esteem. You are too insignificant for that. Find another occupation, or try to grow up.
Then we can lead a normal conversation.

 

[Zabaniyah]

^^^^

 

[Akasa]

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'.

As with the J-11B and J-15. Their airframes are very similar to the ones on the Su-27SK and Su-33, but key differences remain. Those differences would be the increase in composites, changes to its intakes, application of RAM, etc.

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.

The J-11B and J-15 uses indigenously developed technologies, including avionics. I do not see how that "broke" any contract. The key thing is, the J-11B is not an "unauthorized Flanker" because it is hardly a "Flanker" at all. The only component that the contract might have had any legitimate argument over was its airframe. But even that was modified.

 

[Akasa]

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.

If their airframe of the J-10 remains the same but their technologies are different, then I have no right to call it a "J-10".

Wasn't it you who said that the Su-35 airframe uses different alloys than the original Sukhois? The airframes, like you said, were very similar, but not the same.

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.

Some answers to your question:
- Yes, the production WS-15 engine for the J-20 will in fact incorporate TVC
- The canards on the J-20 does provide it with higher angle of attack and thus greater maneuverability at subsonic speeds.
- The WS-15 engines provides more thrust than the T-50, and seeing that the loaded weights of the J-20 and T-50 are about the same, it is very possible that the J-20 will have a higher thrust to weight ratio
- The delta wing configuration on the J-20 reduces transonic and supersonic drag, thus allowing much higher agility at higher speeds

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

If their airframe of the J-10 remains the same but their technologies are different, then I have no right to call it a "J-10".

Wasn't it you who said that the Su-35 airframe uses different alloys than the original Sukhois? The airframes, like you said, were very similar, but not the same.








Some answers to your question:
- Yes, the production WS-15 engine for the J-20 will in fact incorporate TVC
- The canards on the J-20 does provide it with higher angle of attack and thus greater maneuverability at subsonic speeds.
- The WS-15 engines provides more thrust than the T-50, and seeing that the loaded weights of the J-20 and T-50 are about the same, it is very possible that the J-20 will have a higher thrust to weight ratio
- The delta wing configuration on the J-20 reduces transonic and supersonic drag, thus allowing much higher agility at higher speeds

J-20 is larger than both F-22 and T-50. Thus, we need a higher thrust jet engine like WS-15.

 

[Akasa]

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 .

My so called "imagination driven fantasy" is that it is too early to say much about the Type 095, which is logically the thing to say when the submarine hasn't even been built yet. You are the one giving these make believe assumptions about how the Yasen is somehow more quiet than the Virginia or the future Type 095.

Sources? What sources? All you have shown me is a chart of what some analysts THINK the noise levels of some current submarines are. And the Yasen isn't even on there.

I guess the Borei class submarine must be "superior" to the Ohio and Type 096 submarines because you "expect" them to be, right?

 

[Akasa]

Stop.

1. Your skin is the concept of "plane". If we consider the matter seriously. The skin for the aircraft is covering his paint. The airframe is the skeleton of the aircraft. The airframe is a complex structure. He meets many requirements (aerodynamics, durability, reliability, etc.).
Each aircraft has an individual hull design (or a different appearance).
For example, if we compare the appearance of two aircraft (Su -27, and F-15). Despite some similarities (you will immediately distinguish one from another plane). They are a completely different design. These jets create different aviation schools. These aircraft have a different philosophy. You will not find any similar items.

2. Why China is using the airframe and engines of the Russian aircraft. Because the Chinese aircraft manufacturers are engaged in it from the beginning (the birth of the aviation industry in China). Since the beginning of the MiG is now Su-27/33. The main occupation of the Chinese designers is not the development of new designs. The main task of the Chinese designers is recycling other people's projects.

Processing has two stages.

1. To adapt the model for the possibility of Chinese industry. If the Chinese industry is not technically possible to create what - what part of the aircraft. Chinese designers are trying to find an alternative to them (in the best of my ability).

2. Trying to upgrade. Modernization is basically an attempt to introduce new elements. As a design, and foreign copies.



1. You claim that within plane has changed.
I do not contradict this. Like I said, Chinese engineers are trying to replace some items. This work is in the world is called modernization. In China it is the main occupation.

2. You can not use "alien" airframe / aircraft design to build a new plane.
It just makes no sense. Each airframe has its well-defined size, weight, volume (which depends on the capabilities of the engine and internal equipment). As there are two similar fingerprints, so no two are identical to the case of aircraft. Chinese engineers can not change the body the Su-27. Because they still can not independently develop some systems ..
I repeat once more. China is engaged in illegal copying and licensing (of dubious quality) changes in the original draft of the Su-27.

1. Despite the being the "skeleton" of the aircraft, modern day air to air combat rely almost wholly on its internal capabilities and components. Even then, the J-11B and J-15 airframe are extensively modified from their original Sukhoi counterparts.

2. Funny thing is, China is not using Russian engines on their J-11B and J-15 fighters, and even the airframes were extensively modernized. The WS-10, WS-12, WS-13, and WS-15 do not use Russian components or design, buddy. Why don't you stop stereotyping and do some research for a while? You are embarrassing yourself here.



1. They are not trying to replace "some items". Everything has changed. The J-11B is a new plane in a Su-27 skin. The J-15 is a new plane in a Su-33 skin. The J-10A's airframe has proved to be much more agile than the Su-27SK. Why did they stick with the Su-27SK airframe? Because they find it to be much cheaper.

2. Yes you can. That's why they built the Su-35 from the Su-33 airframe. That's why the T-50's airframe was modified from a Flanker one.

China is not engaged in "illegal copying and licensing" because the J-11B and J-15 are not copies of anything. The airframe is the only component that remains similar. But even that has been modified.

 

[Akasa]

J-20 is larger than both F-22 and T-50. Thus, we need a higher thrust jet engine like WS-15.

Their loaded weights are almost exactly the same, however.

 

[Speeder 2]

The newest "shark-skin" Speedo swimming suit helps the speed, a lot.

Now put Michael Phelps into your fancy Speedo, assuming you are of the same size, doesn't make him swim as slow as you do !

Neither does it make Phelps an ´unauthorised HROBOS or ptlm3´ or something, get the point?


J-11B has different -- and superior for that matter -- brain, heart and soul from Su 27sk, which

count much more than the airfram.




Yet nonethless, the way these people argue as if they wanna kill a man.


Pay the su or hoi guy goddamnit!

Just think about 61 years or 63.4 years!


Pay some token airframes and stop this ´unautrorised blah blah` bullcrap!

(btw shenyang is full of crap too!)




Allow me lead by example ---

Nah, HROBOS, above are my 2 cents, spend wisely...

... and Welcome to the Free World!