China All Su-35 news

[tvsram1992]

^^^^^^

Needs this for his butthurt...

since how many days are you using it?

 

[rcrmj]

Good! Let them stick with their Junk Fighter 17s and Junk 10s. Good for everybody! The chinese govt industries can make profits and kickbacks by making junks and the rest of the world stays safe. Everybody wins.

lol``at least contain your inferior complexity well and use your brain to troll if you have one

 

[ptldM3]

Thats why I said you are stupid as you answer your own question

You know that production without r&d is possible such as license manufacturing, but u argue/reject my statement that we could produce without r&d.

And more pathetic thing is even until now u do not realize your stupidity.

No knucklehead, I clearly stated that production without research and development is possible as long as it is licensed production . Other then that, it is not possible to mass produce even a cup without research and development.

Get it or do I need to go really sloooowwww?

What I rant is very clear from the beginning, that : "China has r&d capability to develop so called virgilous; and it is much related to the topic.

It is you that ranting useless point like grammar etc in order to excuse your failure to comprehend my points, and it is a shame and unacceptable excuse, and this excuse demonstrate your problem with IQ or verbal capability.

Your rant is not clear and can hardly be related to the subject---again. What does license production have to do with the Virgilous? No one will let China copy it, remember? So your entire argument has been counter productive.. If you have a grasp of the English language you would know I stated license production is possible without research and development, and you would know that license production is totally not relevant to our discussion of developing something on your own.

So if we do a review we will see that your argument is totally unrelated and worthless, and it does not prove anything other then you have poor debating skills.

You have stated the same thing/argument that I have replied/answered/broken multiple times. It means you have failed to understand my very simple reply, and it demonstrate your ignorance and idiocy.

I have said many times that China could develop virgilous with her own r&d, not by copying, and you are full of ignorance.

No knucklehead, you have stated that China can produce something without research and development and I agreed as long as it is based on license production. I never claimed that China can not produce a similar system to the Virgilous, instead I claimed it would be impossible to replicate the Virgilous, since it’s unique.

Besides, you have made another stupid statement above saying that no one will allow china to copy..... as if somebody else except china would be allowed to copy.

What a stupidhead copying military technology basically is not allowed for anyone - not only china; and china doesn't require somebody permission for copying/re.

Wow, did I just read that correctly? Do you think China gives a rats tail if copying is allowed or not? China has a long history of copying.

I am not saying the difference of them in context of virgilous. Like i said many times to you and you are ignorant/ fail to understand, I am saying the difference of production and r&d because you were mixing them up and thought they were the same

I always knew the difference between production and research. Remember early in the discussion I stated that it is possible to produce something without research and development as long as its license based? Don’t blame your poor memory and reading skills on me.

I am expecting you could move ahead in the discussion by not repeating something that I have answered many times but you many times fail to see.

Likewise, I’m expecting for you to be careful about what you accuse me of because everyone of your claims has been disproven by my earlier posts.

 

[antonius123]

No knucklehead, I clearly stated that production without research and development is possible as long as it is licensed production . Other then that, it is not possible to mass produce even a cup without research and development.

Get it or do I need to go really sloooowwww?

I have told you many times, u are very sloow.

And the most stupid and funniest thing of you is: your argument about production by licensing (without our own r&d) is opposing what you have arguing/debating me when I said we could produce without r&d

Do you now realize why I said you are stupid head?

Your rant is not clear and can hardly be related to the subject---again. What does license production have to do with the Virgilous? No one will let China copy it, remember? So your entire argument has been counter productive.. If you have a grasp of the English language you would know I stated license production is possible without research and development, and you would know that license production is totally not relevant to our discussion of developing something on your own.
So if we do a review we will see that your argument is totally unrelated and worthless, and it does not prove anything other then you have poor debating skills.

U are verly2 slow.

Nobody said somebody give license or let china copy virgilous, I said china develop virgilous with her own R&D.

U are really stupid head, no wonder u miss understand many things as you are so ignorant and incapable to comprehend the simplest thing

No knucklehead, you have stated that China can produce something without research and development and I agreed as long as it is based on license production. I never claimed that China can not produce a similar system to the Virgilous, instead I claimed it would be impossible to replicate the Virgilous, since it’s unique.

Stupidhead.. I said china could produce virgilous with her own r&d; Nobody said china will produce virgilous by license, copy, etc.

It is you that are moronic, mixing up both r&d and production capability and claiming that china would not produce virgilous without copying/stealing/getting license/etc

Wow, did I just read that correctly? Do you think China gives a rats tail if copying is allowed or not? China has a long history of copying.

Thats why I am saying u were stupid.

U said china could not copy because Europe/Usa wont allow china to copy... what a stupid statement, as you know most copying is done without agreement/license from the owner of the tech

And am telling you what I have said from the beginning: "China has r&d capability to develop virgilous, etc"

I always knew the difference between production and research. Remember early in the discussion I stated that it is possible to produce something without research and development as long as its license based? Don’t blame your poor memory and reading skills on me.

I dont forget.

I only laugh at your because you are answering what you were questioning

At first you argued/debated me about production without r&d, but later you said production actually could be done without r&d by license, it is opposing your own argument.

It is pathetically stupid.

Likewise, I’m expecting for you to be careful about what you accuse me of because everyone of your claims has been disproven by my earlier posts.

Your earlier and repeated post has been answered/broken by me repeatedly without your capability to counter back properly except by repeating again and again the answered argument like a spoiled cd player

 

[ptldM3]

I have told you many times, u are very sloow.

And the stupid thing is: you are answering what you were questioning me

Now do you realize that you dont need to question me about that production without r&d, as you already answer that possibility

The only one slow here is you, how many times must I remind you that I clearly, explicitly and very directly stated that you not need research and development to produce something under license, but in all other circumstances you need research and development.

Clearly I’m debating with a grade A moron that can’t put two and two together.

U are verly2 slow.

Nobody said somebody give license or let china copy virgilous, I said china develop virgilous with her own R&D.

U are really stupid head, no wonder u miss understand many things as you are so ignorant and incapable to comprehend the simplest thing

This just proves your lower intellect. It was you that mentioned developing something under license, remember? I never questioned China developing an ECM suit, instead I stated that it would be impossible to develop something identical to the Virgilous.

The part highlighting your lower intellect is that you mentioned both matters, even worst is that both the subjects of license production and China’s research and development share no common grounds. Further, I know you said China can develop the Virgilous, I have quoted you, what is your point?

Stupidhead..

I said china could produce virgilous with her own r&d;
Nobody said china will produce virgilous by license, copy, etc.

Again, a sign of your lower intellect. When did I imply that you said someone will let China license copy the Virgilous?

It is you that are moronic, mixing up both r&d and production capability and claiming that china would not produce virgilous without copying/stealing/getting license/etc

Your are a shameless liar. When did I ever mix up research and development with production? I stated that a product can be produced without research and development as long as its under license. You seem to have a hard time grasping that don’t you?

And China can not produce the Virgilous without copying it, not because they are dumb but because it is unique and without physically studying it they will not be able to produce it, no one will. China can built an ECM that might be similar to the Virgilous but it will not be the same thing.

Thats why I am saying u were stupid.

U said china could not copy because Europe/Usa wont allow china to copy... what a stupid statement,

How is that stupid? it’s true. Even China’s AWACS deal with Israel was cancelled due to US pressure, so you are the stupid one?

as you know most copying is done without agreement/license from the owner of the tech

Tell me something I didn’t know…

And am telling you what I have said from the beginning: "China has r&d capability to develop virgilous, etc"

No they don’t and I explained why. They would need to physically have a Virgilous system to copy it. Let me, tell you a little secret, ECM’s all differ, even the forms of jamming varies, there are many methods of jamming, how can you be sure what type the Virgilous uses? The point is to copy the Virgilous, remember? So it would have to be identical, not similar not better, but identical.

I dont forget.

I only laugh at your answering what you were questioning

At first you argued/debated me about production without r&d, but later you said roduction actually could be done without r&d by license, it is opposing your own argument.

It is pathetically stupid.

No, the only thing pathetic is you. Producing something under license is distinctly different from producing something on your own--the discussion was about China’s ability to produce the Virgilous, obviously China can not produce the Virgilous unless it is licensed and I stated many times no one will grant China a license to produce the Virgilous, so for China to produce something similar to the Virgilous they will need to conduct research and development. Or in other words, China producing something like the Virgilous under license is out of the question so they will definitely need research and development---let me say that again they will definitely need research and development. Understand or do I need to repeat myself again?

Your earlier and repeated post has been answered/broken by me repeatedly without your capability to counter back properly except by repeating again and again the answered argument like a spoiled cd player

The problem is not me but you and your inability to comprehend anything I say.

 

[antonius123]

The only one slow here is you, how many times must I remind you that I clearly, explicitly and very directly stated that you not need research and development to produce something under license, but in all other circumstances you need research and development.

Clearly I’m debating with a grade A moron that can’t put two and two together.

If you have known about this, then why did you ask it to me?
Why did you argue my statement saying that we could produce without r&d?

Who is grade A moron here if?

This just proves your lower intellect. It was you that mentioned developing something under license, remember? I never questioned China developing an ECM suit, instead I stated that it would be impossible to develop something identical to the Virgilous.

I never said china would produce virgilous under license, I said many timest china could produce virgilous with her own r&d

So you are the one with lowest intellect here

The part highlighting your lower intellect is that you mentioned both matters, even worst is that both the subjects of license production and China’s research and development share no common grounds. Further, I know you said China can develop the Virgilous, I have quoted you, what is your point?

I mention both matters in different context.
I mentioned china has strong r&d capability to develop virgilous
I mentioned we could produce without our own r&d

What make you confused with those simple sentences?
You seem so confused that mix them up, then blame me for your being confused and inability to distinguish the points of 2 different sentences? what a pathetic IQ

Btw i have told you that i explain production without r&d to show u the difference of both because u mixed them up. Are u sick of dimentia?

Again, a sign of your lower intellect. When did I imply that you said someone will let China license copy the Virgilous?

If your intellect is not that low, why are u ranting about china's problem with copying virgilous while other are ranting argument about china's virgilous production by own r&d?

Your are a shameless liar. When did I ever mix up research and development with production? I stated that a product can be produced without research and development as long as its under license. You seem to have a hard time grasping that don’t you?

U forgot ur own argument bellow:

Do you ever actually think before you push the post button? If China has the R&D to develop the Virgilus (which you claimed they did) than what or why do they lack in capability? Key words here are research and development. So if China can come up with an idea which is the research part and than have the ability to produce it which is the development part than why are they incapable of developing the Virgilus?

You claim that Production is Development part of R&D which is totally wrong

IT is obvious that u cant distinguish R&D and Production, and mixed them up.

Admit it! you cant expect other people to forgot your mistaken claim and try to run

And China can not produce the Virgilous without copying it, not because they are dumb but because it is unique and without physically studying it they will not be able to produce it, no one will. China can built an ECM that might be similar to the Virgilous but it will not be the same thing.

Again U repeat argument that I have counter without your ability to broke my counter.

Whether due to ur dementia, or ur tried to forget because u have no more excuse to run from stupid claim.

- I have asked u the base of your claim above.
- I also have explained that no rule in this universe prevent somebody to catch other technology and build something with the same or even more effectiveness.
- I have given u 2 examples: 1st is the fastest bullet train, 2nd longsoon chip; both are built by china and both are not totally the same as Germany/Japanese Bullet Train and Intel CPU.

Where is ur counter for those?

How is that stupid? it’s true. Even China’s AWACS deal with Israel was cancelled due to US pressure, so you are the stupid one?

Again u miss my point; more prove ur stupidity

I said it was a stupid statement, because copying doesnt require any other consent.

Copying is stealing in nature, it is called stealing because we take it without the consent of the owner, do you understand?? so ur saying nobody will allow china to copy is a foolish statement.

China could do that by many ways including intruding to target's database as she has done by stealing secret of F-35, and that doesnt require any consent.

So ur saying that nobody will allow china to copy is a stupid claim.

Tell me something I didn’t know…

Already above ..

No they don’t and I explained why. They would need to physically have a Virgilous system to copy it. Let me, tell you a little secret, ECM’s all differ, even the forms of jamming varies, there are many methods of jamming, how can you be sure what type the Virgilous uses? The point is to copy the Virgilous, remember? So it would have to be identical, not similar not better, but identical.

We dont need to follow exactly the same system/configuration in order to obtain the same performance. It is if we are talking about r&d.

Longsoon is one example how China CPU could reach the same performance with Intel CPU without having exactly the same way of Intel CPU. So ur above argument fail.

Talking about copying/stealing, china could steal Typhoon' Virgilous System by the same way as she intruding to Lockheed data base. so based on copying sense, ur argument above also fails.

No, the only thing pathetic is you. Producing something under license is distinctly different from producing something on your own--the discussion was about China’s ability to produce the Virgilous, obviously China can not produce the Virgilous unless it is licensed and I stated many times no one will grant China a license to produce the Virgilous, so for China to produce something similar to the Virgilous they will need to conduct research and development. Or in other words, China producing something like the Virgilous under license is out of the question so they will definitely need research and development---let me say that again they will definitely need research and development. Understand or do I need to repeat myself again?

This is not true, see my explanation above.
Remember, I also have replied you many times for this argument, but u failed to counter back instead of repeating the same thing.

Like u, i also believe nobody will grant china the virgilous technology.

But China could produce by her own r&d, even stealing (if she want).

The problem is not me but you and your inability to comprehend anything I say.

If that is the case, why u repeat the same thing that I have replied without bringing counter that breaking my reply?

Ur repeating things that I have answered proves it is you that have problem to comprehend and IQ

 

[Malik Alashter]

It looks like China is really buying the Su-35 I have read this in Defense-talk???? so how come China talk about fifth Gen. fighter or the J-15 that the say its comparable to the F-18 and rafale???? my question is if I make great airplane like that why should I buy similar one.

 

[antonius123]

@ptldM3

ptldM3, yuuhuuuu.... this is a very interesting article for your opening eyes and learning
China has stolen sensitive data/tech of F-35 system from BAE System (is this one of the company that developed virgilius ECM for Eurofighter Typhoon? )


Security experts admit China stole secret F-35 fighter jet plans
The Australian, March 12, 2012 12:00AM

CHINESE spies hacked into computers belonging to BAE Systems, Britain's biggest defence company, to steal details about the design, performance and electronic systems of the West's latest fighter jet, senior security figures have disclosed.

The Chinese exploited vulnerabilities in BAE's computer defences to steal vast amounts of data on the $300 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, a multinational project to create a plane that will give the West air supremacy for years to come, according to the sources.

The hacking attack has prompted fears that the fighter jet's advanced radar capabilities could have been compromised.

Details of the attack on BAE have been a closely guarded secret within Britain's intelligence community since it was first uncovered nearly three years ago. But they were disclosed by a senior BAE executive during a private dinner in London for cyber security experts late last year.

One of those present said: "The BAE man said that for 18 months, Chinese cyber attacks had taken place against BAE and had managed to get hold of plans of one of its latest fighters."

BAE said: "We don't comment on allegations of cyber attacks against the company. BAE Systems' own cyber security capability can detect, prevent and rectify such attacks."

A former US official, speaking last week on condition of anonymity, said the BAE Systems element of the JSF program had "almost certainly" been penetrated.

However, he cautioned: "There are lots of aspects of weapons development. At least some aspects of it (the F-35 project) were targeted successfully by the Chinese. They didn't steal everything that was on that airplane, just some aspects."

The Chinese embassy in London described the claims as a "baseless allegation".

It said China condemned all forms of online crime.

Suspicions that the Joint Strike Fighter had been targeted by Chinese hackers first emerged in the US media in 2009.

The Sunday Times

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian


===========================================================================================


Nobody could disapprove china from stealing and copying.

The question is: which one is more advanced between Typhoon Avionics and F-35 Avionics?

 

[Yeti]

By Reuben F Johnson

3/16/2012


Russian fears that China would copy its Sukhoi Su-35 fighter aircraft may yet scupper a deal that Moscow and Beijing are reportedly close to signing for an export sale of the fighter to the People's Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF).

A source in the Russian government told the influential Moscow daily Kommersant : "The two sides are in practical agreement regarding the delivery to the PRC [People's Republic of China] of 48 Su-35s at a cost of USD4 billion."

However, reports on this sale continue with the additional detail that "an unanticipated obstacle to the deal has emerged. Moscow is requiring that Beijing provide a legally binding guarantee that it will refrain from making reverse-engineered copies of the Russian fighter - largely so that this does not create a potential competitor in the market to sell the aircraft to other countries. China is no hurry to provide this guarantee."

Russian sources close to the Federal Service for Military-Technical Co-operation (FSVTS) state that such a guarantee "is an essential condition" of the sale. Some of the same industry sources point out that the Chinese have used their assistance from Russia or have copied designs to create competitors for almost every class of combat aircraft that Russian industry offers for export and they do not want a repeat of this experience.
215 of 937 words



Russian industry wary of Su-35 sale to China

 

[pilli]

whats the need of Su35 when we have J20 performing wonders?

 

[Yeti]

whats the need of Su35 when we have J20 performing wonders?

J20 uses russian engines your Chinese engines not up to the job

Chinese

As of now, the J-20 flies with two Russian AL-31F jet engines it borrowed from the Russian Su-27 fighter jet that entered Chinese service in the mid-1980s.


China also tried to put engines of their own on a second test J-20 vehicle, but the copycat of the Soviet engine AL-31F made by China is not in the same league as the Russian analogue for reliability and durability.

The real problem is both AL-31F and Chinese version are engines of the previous generation.

 

[no_koadsheding_plz]

as for those who say china copying,, i should tell them its useless to reinvent the wheel,, and copying is when china uses no own logic,
but fact is china is using ownn machinery,own knowledge brain and all the commerial off the shelf now how to make something that fits their use,,

and as far as the goal is to make something immune of foreign pressure its good,,,

 

[Aramsogo]

This is so funny and predictable. I think Chinese member "Aerospace Engineer" already predicted this would be the Russian response to Chinese MOD denial of any purchases.

BTW, not a single Indian has made good their pledge in the Su-35 Charity Challenge (also fully predictable).

 

[Yeti]

Not suprising Russia wants to put a water tight contract in place to stop the Chinese doing that they did with the J-11.

 

[nitetrogen70]

this doesn't make sense why would the Russians even sell them the fighter if they know that china might copy it