What's new

Brazilian aviation experts recommended J11B /SU27

.
What makes you say that it's a copy.
It's a further development by it's manufacturer who owns it's IPR's 100%.
Not a cheap ripoff of an old system of the 90's.

Only the airframe of the J-11B is a copy of the Flanker family for the convenience sake, the rests like AESA/Engine/TVC Nozzle/Composite Material have nothing to do with Russia.

Since J-11B is a major upgraded of J-11A, which itself is an upgrade of Su-27SK, it is nothing wrong that J-11B does look like a modernized Flanker.
 
.
Only the airframe of the J-11B is a copy of the Flanker family for the convenience sake, the rests like AESA/Engine/TVC Nozzle/Composite Material have nothing to do with Russia.

Since J-11B is a major upgraded of J-11A, which itself is an upgrade of Su-27SK, it is nothing wrong that J-11B does look like a modernized Flanker.

All your AESA/Engine/TVC Nozzel claim are fanboy ... First make them pubilc before big claim of better version then Russian tech

If you already develop engine for all these planes they why Russian engine for JF17 ??

Why AESA not for JF17 Block2 ???
 
.
And I suppose you made that up? :lol:

The FC-1 is still under evaluation by the PLAAF. Evaluation does not mean they are going to reject it.

The JF-17 is exclusively built for Pakistan, since it was Pakistan proposed this joint project first.
 
.
Only the airframe of the J-11B is a copy of the Flanker family for the convenience sake, the rests like AESA/Engine/TVC Nozzle/Composite Material have nothing to do with Russia.

Since J-11B is a major upgraded of J-11A, which itself is an upgrade of Su-27SK, it is nothing wrong that J-11B does look like a modernized Flanker.
Do remind me when it is integrated with Chinese 'AESA/Engine/TVC Nozzle'.
 
.
. .
Thts why you are not able to sell your planes even with cheap prices ???

Our air force needs a major upgrade, currently our production can only fulfill our own needs, thus we don't have the plan to export our aircrafts, except J-10B for Pakistan.
 
.
With a large RCS, lack of composites, lack of radar absorbent material, how will the MKI hold the upper hand in BVR?

Everything that is coming out of China these days is covered in RAM and composites including my toaster. A good question would be, where is the proof? Is it what ‘insiders’ have claimed?

People throw around the words composites and RAM with reckless abandonment. Firstly all aircraft consist largely of composites, second of all, most composites do nothing to reduce an aircraft’s RCS, in fact your bathroom and automobile are made up of composites. Some composites such as honeycomb can reduce RCS but don’t expect a large improvement and don’t think it is possible to use such material in large quantities.

And now the question becomes are the composites you are referring to make up an aircraft’s total surface or weight?

Now RAM, it also works, but again don’t expect anything significant.

Now your question of how an MKI will hold up even if it does have a larger RCS (which you can not prove). If the MKI is able to jam an enemy aircraft that just so happens to have a smaller RCS that is how it will hold up. If the MKI has a higher cell resolution, that is how it will hold up. If the MKI has a better data-link and more reliable A2A weapons that is how it will hold up. If the MKI’s radar allows the MKI to achieve first lock that is how it will hold up. If the MKI’s EW suit is able to deny the enemy any shot, than that is how it will hold up. Remeber the F-15 a high RCS aircraft acheived kills against much smaller RCS aircraft.
 
.
dil bahlane ko ye khayal achcha hai galib lol

:what:? English?

China has remained on the fence regarding the program, with no PLAAF orders to date. Their air force appears to be more focused on their 4+ generation J-10 design, which offers more advanced capabilities and aerodynamics. The FC-1 remains a candidate to replace large numbers of PLAAF MiG-17s (J-5) and MiG-19s (J-6/ Q-5), if the PLAAF decides it needs to take steps to maintain the size of its force. If not, the FC-1’s role is likely to resemble the Northrop F-5’s. The USA sold them in large numbers to other countries, even as the USAF equipped itself with larger and more expensive designs instead.
Pakistan & China’s JF-17 Fighter Program
http://www.defence.pk/forums/jf-17-thunder/150839-jf-17-thunder-still-under-evaluation-plaaf.html

At least come up with a damn source that PLAAF have rejected the FC-1 other than mere hearsay.
 
.
If you already develop engine for all these planes they why Russian engine for JF17 ??

:lol:

271720132a2ad18d2ba0356.jpg


j1520.jpg


hiaw0.jpg


8730f.jpg
 
. . . . .

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom