China All Su-35 news

[Beast]

I am sure the real scientists in all the countries respect each other much more than people on the internet do.

Tell that to those narrow minded nationalistic Russian too.

Hehe, how about this "wonderful flagship" in the Black Sea? I guess it's a flagship of the Black Sea Fleet? lol

File:

Or this one, from 1983, only 30 years old, lol.

File:Slava-Cruiser-DN-SC-86-03642.JPEG - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Don't forget those 200 MiG-29 that can't even fly and should be scrapped according to Russian sources. At least, our J-8 are still working and can fly at least.

Not to mention the fact, that France is building ships for Russia these days. and they have to import second or third-hand UAVs from Israel.

Precisely, those were never heard during Soviet Union times and Soviet union was already 20 years ago old story.

 

[Developereo]

Tell that to those narrow minded nationalistic Russian too.

Absolutely.

Anyone who claims that Chinese achievements are the result of "copying" or "lack basic knowledge" only expose their own ignorance.

Like I wrote, I am sure real Russian/American scientists have a lot of respect for Chinese scientists, and vice versa.

 

[StarCraft_ZT]

it is great!!

 

[ptldM3]

and this know-how is not only about the aerodynamics (which is the least aspect to learn, as CAC and SAC spent decades on it, although just on paper), but the techniques, avionics, radars and its structural design.

your assumption and that is what it is, is false. Ever wonder why advisers at Yakovlev advised the Chinese and Italians when they were building training aircraft? Ever wonder why China purchased the T-10 from Ukraine? If it were so easy to produce airframes none of this would be necessary.

Given the right people, resources, funding, and facilities an airframe can be built (with time) but there is no guarantee that it will be very good in terms of flight characteristics, endurance, payload, ect. Again, this is why China continues to built flankers derivatives, it's easier to upgrade a platform then built an entirely new one. Moreover, with the case of the flanker the aircraft is pushing the limits of aviation, it has the range and payload of a light bomber but the maneuverability of an aerobatics aircraft.

China keeps developing 27 series are not because how advanced it is (aerodynamically yes), it is because Su-27 series is the one of the backbones of PLAAF alone with J-10, so 100% indigenous is vital to PLAAF's fighting power,

You know, anyone can cross check facts and the fact is that the SU-27 was never the backbone of the PLAAF, China only produced or acquired around 100 SU-27s and by now many have been retired.

So now that the truth is know about the SU-27 numbers why would the PLAAF and PLAN start to not only acquire flankers from Russia such as the SU-30 but also continue to produce flanker variants? Could it be because the flanker broke no less then 40 world records? Could it be because the range, weapons payload, maneuverability and flexibility of the flanker platform is unrivaled and quite frankly difficult to match.


Why don't we see the JH-7, which is much newer than the SU-27 being produced in numbers like we see flankers? Think about it, the JH-7 essentially does the same role as the Flanker, is much newer, and is indigenous, yet China prefers the Flanker wether it be a single seater, multirole double seater, or naval, China chooses the Older Russian designed flanker over the newer JH-7.

and as people from SAC said the upgrades on Su-27/30 were mainly for its material, weapon system, avionics and radar, which they believe now they are surpassing the Russians, not the structural design.

Yet China ordered KA-31 and KA-28 electronic warfare helicopters from Russia not too long ago. Why would China order electronics warfare aircraft from Russia when most here claim that Russian avionics are inferior?

Besides the people from the SAC have no access to the latest Russian avionics, so how would they know this? Even the KA-31s and KA-28s were export versions and Russia has been know to leave out certain systems on export aircraft.

and it was also true that at the very beginning China sent people to talk with Russians about co-developing a 5th gen fighter aka Pak-fa, however, they were not impressed, as they believed both concepts of J-20 from CAC and J-31 from SAC were surpassing Pak-fa in many crucial areas, like aerodynamics, avionics, weapon system, radar and stealth.

How would the Chinese believe they had a superior aircraft with superior radar, aerodynamics, weapons, ect if none of it existed. Heck even if Russia had a prototype there is no way China could varify the prototypes performance just by looking at it. Why do you think Sukhoi intends to put the pak-fa through 2000 test flights? The designers themselves are not 100% sure about an aircraft's performance until they actually physically test it, and so far the pak-fa is exceeding expectations.

So in reality, Russia never had a pak-fa to show to China or any systems for the pak-fa, nor did they have any test data from the pak-fa, and the Chinese concluded that they had a superior aircraft? Keep believing those fairytales from 'insiders' or people at 'SAC'.

apart from Russian, no one thinks t-50 is a true capable 5th gen fighter, it is just a 'flattened' flanker,

This is ignorance, if the pak-fa is just a flattened flanker then the J-20 is just a black J-10 with an extra vertical stabilizer. Why not just call the F-22 an upgraded F-15?

There is not one design feature on the pak-fa that is taken from a flanker, in terms of design the pak-fa has less in common with the flanker then the F-22 does with the F-15.

and also only Russians believe that they are good at radar and avionics, yet based on PLAAF years awful experience with those, even we are buying anything from Russia the first thing to replace are the radars and avionics.

Total nonsense, China purchased KA-31's and KA-28's from Russia, the only reason they purchased these was because of the electronics warfare capabilities, why would China purchase a more expensive specialized version of a helicopter when they could just purchase a cheaper off the shelf helicopter and install their own electronics?

China purchased the KA-31's and KA-28's even though China has helicopters for anti submarine patrols/electronics warfare.

 

[Beast]

your assumption and that is what it is, is false. Ever wonder why advisers at Yakovlev advised the Chinese and Italians when they were building training aircraft? Ever wonder why China purchased the T-10 from Ukraine? If it were so easy to produce airframes none of this would be necessary.

Given the right people, resources, funding, and facilities an airframe can be built (with time) but there is no guarantee that it will be very good in terms of flight characteristics, endurance, payload, ect. Again, this is why China continues to built flankers derivatives, it's easier to upgrade a platform then built an entirely new one. Moreover, with the case of the flanker the aircraft is pushing the limits of aviation, it has the range and payload of a light bomber but the maneuverability of an aerobatics aircraft.





You know, anyone can cross check facts and the fact is that the SU-27 was never the backbone of the PLAAF, China only produced or acquired around 100 SU-27s and by now many have been retired.

So now that the truth is know about the SU-27 numbers why would the PLAAF and PLAN start to not only acquire flankers from Russia such as the SU-30 but also continue to produce flanker variants? Could it be because the flanker broke no less then 40 world records? Could it be because the range, weapons payload, maneuverability and flexibility of the flanker platform is unrivaled and quite frankly difficult to match.


Why don't we see the JH-7, which is much newer than the SU-27 being produced in numbers like we see flankers? Think about it, the JH-7 essentially does the same role as the Flanker, is much newer, and is indigenous, yet China prefers the Flanker wether it be a single seater, multirole double seater, or naval, China chooses the Older Russian designed flanker over the newer JH-7.






Yet China ordered KA-31 and KA-28 electronic warfare helicopters from Russia not too long ago. Why would China order electronics warfare aircraft from Russia when most here claim that Russian avionics are inferior?

Besides the people from the SAC have no access to the latest Russian avionics, so how would they know this? Even the KA-31s and KA-28s were export versions and Russia has been know to leave out certain systems on export aircraft.






How would the Chinese believe they had a superior aircraft with superior radar, aerodynamics, weapons, ect if none of it existed. Heck even if Russia had a prototype there is no way China could varify the prototypes performance just by looking at it. Why do you think Sukhoi intends to put the pak-fa through 2000 test flights? The designers themselves are not 100% sure about an aircraft's performance until they actually physically test it, and so far the pak-fa is exceeding expectations.

So in reality, Russia never had a pak-fa to show to China or any systems for the pak-fa, nor did they have any test data from the pak-fa, and the Chinese concluded that they had a superior aircraft? Keep believing those fairytales from 'insiders' or people at 'SAC'.










This is ignorance, if the pak-fa is just a flattened flanker then the J-20 is just a black J-10 with an extra vertical stabilizer. Why not just call the F-22 an upgraded F-15?

There is not one design feature on the pak-fa that is taken from a flanker, in terms of design the pak-fa has less in common with the flanker then the F-22 does with the F-15.




Total nonsense, China purchased KA-31's and KA-28's from Russia, the only reason they purchased these was because of the electronics warfare capabilities, why would China purchase a more expensive specialized version of a helicopter when they could just purchase a cheaper off the shelf helicopter and install their own electronics?

China purchased the KA-31's and KA-28's even though China has helicopters for anti submarine patrols/electronics warfare.

Buying Russian Ka-31 and Ka-28 is only used as a backup. The main one AEW that will serve onboard CV-16 is domestic Z-8AEW which is more advance and powerful. Russian one which is more inferior will use in lesser important ship. Chinese always do things more precariously. You see US buy many foreign arms from Europe and Israel. Does it mean it is not capable of producing it? By doing it this way,it can reduce production cause and shorter development so that it can quickly mass equipped for lesser important unit.

And also TK-10 prototypes is a non workable aircraft which is not able to use on carrier. This comment is comfirmed by Russian analysis. Buying TK-10 is irrelevant. Even without it, we will still able to make our own J-15. We just buy T-10K as a backup in case we really could not figure out making a carrier version of flanke. See J-15S which is a twin seater and never produced by Russian. May I know which prototype we use as reference since Russian itself never has a twin seater Su-33 version?

 

[PRC2025]

Why don't we see the JH-7, which is much newer than the SU-27 being produced in numbers like we see flankers?

My reply

Eeh, what? JH-7 is comparable to Su-24. It has nothing to do with Air-Superiority or Multi-role fighters. They are mostly used for bombing strikes against ground targets and supporting ground troops.

Just as RuAF did against Georgia in August 2008, and still lost several aircraft against a country such as Georgia.

There is no point for PLAAF to sit with a large number of JH-7. PLAAF is producing 4th and 4.5 gen fighters and is focusing on 5th gen fighters and fighter-bombers, including a new type of JH-7 which is rumored to be on of the J-type series; J-16 or rumored J-18.

Now, RuAF has around 25 units of newer Su-34. I mean, do you plan on sending Su-24 or the newer Su-34 against F-16, F-15, F-18, F-22 or F-35 ? No, I don't think RuAF plan on doing that. Neither does PLAAF plan on sending JH-7 up against F-16, F-15, etc etc.

So asking why PLAAF hasn't built more JH-7, is really a useless question. It's like asking why RuAF plan on building total of 120 Su-34 and not more than that. Which is about the same number of JH-7 PLAAF has in service right NOW and is looking to replace them gradually.

Furthermore, it would be like asking you; since T-50 is so "superior", why does Russia plan on building 1.000 of these fighters but only 200 are for the RuAF? The other 800 are going to other countries. 144 to India, and the rest to other countries.

I mean, it's strange that RuAF is basically building T-50, only for export, since 80% of all T-50 are going to other countries. 20% only is going to RuAF.

If we compare this with F-22, 100% are under U.S. control, and if we look at the F-35 number, the U.S. plan on having 80% of all produced F-35s, and only 20% will go to other countries.

I mean, really, please do explain, why 80% of all planned T-50 PAK-FA are going to countries OUTSIDE Russia?

However, China on the other hand, will most likely go the same way as the U.S. J-20s only for China and most of the J-31 will also be for PLAAF, and some will be exported, maybe 20-30% of the total numbers.

So, another question; where is the second stealth fighter for RuAF ? Since RuAF plan on getting only 200 PAK-FA T-50.

Oh, is it imaginary MiG LMFS, which is still being developed in theory? lol. When is LMFS going to be ready? Do tell

Let me give you some funny numbers your Russian sourches are operating with, these numbers are from 2010, before J-20 and J-31 being revealed, lol.

Russia believes in their head that China will import 100 T-50, lol.

VERY FUNNY QUOTE RIGHT HERE:

China (up to 100 units in the years 2025-2035),

Russia to export 600 Sukhoi PAK FA fifth generation jets - English pravda.ru

How is Russian Navy going these days? Oh, I guess straight down the hill from 2015, according to Russian admiral; although I don't need him to confirm what I already know, but it's fun linking to Russian sources, since many of you are in denial.

Russia losing it's navy:

Retired admiral says Russia losing its navy | Navy Times | navytimes.com

 

[rcrmj]

your assumption and that is what it is, is false. Ever wonder why advisers at Yakovlev advised the Chinese and Italians when they were building training aircraft? Ever wonder why China purchased the T-10 from Ukraine? If it were so easy to produce airframes none of this would be necessary.

More your assumption from your side, Russian media and rumor keep assuming that any China’s defence development must have to do with Russians.

Well tell you what, China went to Brazil for that matter. Because PLAN never wanted to learn their AC fleet and operation standards from Russia but western, and you know that western countries assisting China’s AC project is virtually impossible.

But since we have been operating flanker families for long so T-10 was the best candidates for AC, and that’s why we went for Ukraine only for that matter.

The difference between air force plane and AC plane is vastly different, aerodynamic is just one of minor parts of it, since under the condition of same platform which SAC is very familiar with, so what they need are the short cuts of understanding the rest crucial know-hows.

With current China’s capability, we can develop J-15 without the T-10 from Ukraine model, however that will take much longer time which we cannot afford.

Given the right people, resources, funding, and facilities an airframe can be built (with time) but there is no guarantee that it will be very good in terms of flight characteristics, endurance, payload, ect. Again, this is why China continues to built flankers derivatives, it's easier to upgrade a platform then built an entirely new one. Moreover, with the case of the flanker the aircraft is pushing the limits of aviation, it has the range and payload of a light bomber but the manoeuvrability of an aerobatics aircraft.
You know, anyone can cross check facts and the fact is that the SU-27 was never the backbone of the PLAAF, China only produced or acquired around 100 SU-27s and by now many have been retired.
So now that the truth is know about the SU-27 numbers why would the PLAAF and PLAN start to not only acquire flankers from Russia such as the SU-30 but also continue to produce flanker variants? Could it be because the flanker broke no less then 40 world records? Could it be because the range, weapons payload, maneuverability and flexibility of the flanker platform is unrivaled and quite frankly difficult to match.

Your assumption is partially wrong again. China continues to develop flanker and its derivatives are because it’ easier to do on a familiar platform, and also, as I said it before, 300 strong flanker families are the backbone of PLAAF and PLAN

Why don't we see the JH-7, which is much newer than the SU-27 being produced in numbers like we see flankers? Think about it, the JH-7 essentially does the same role as the Flanker, is much newer, and is indigenous, yet China prefers the Flanker wether it be a single seater, multirole double seater, or naval, China chooses the Older Russian designed flanker over the newer JH-7.

You are silly to bring JH-7 into the discussion. JH-7 is no more than a 3rd gen airframe with 4th gen radar, avionics, engine and weapons, designed by none mainstream Xian institution, with the starting date traced back to 70s, when we were still struggling with Mig-21 upgrades J-7 and its variants. And PLAAF never wanted it, in 90s it almost went blue, but handful orders from PLAN saved this plane.

In terms of manoeuverability, airframe, structural and multi purposes, Flanker variants are more capable that JH-7.

Yet China ordered KA-31 and KA-28 electronic warfare helicopters from Russia not too long ago. Why would China order electronics warfare aircraft from Russia when most here claim that Russian avionics are inferior?
Besides the people from the SAC have no access to the latest Russian avionics, so how would they know this? Even the KA-31s and KA-28s were export versions and Russia has been know to leave out certain systems on export aircraft.

Again, China had none experience of building AW helis, buying those are for short cuts, you are over estimating the electronic warfare of Ka-31 or Ka-27. PLAAF and PLAN never wanted to rely their electronic warfare capability on Russians, but our indigenous Y-8 variants, Z-8 AW helis and Y-7 fixed-wing AC board AWACs, plus various electronic pods designed for JH-7, J-10 and Chinese Flanker variants.

How would the Chinese believe they had a superior aircraft with superior radar, aerodynamics, weapons, ect if none of it existed. Heck even if Russia had a prototype there is no way China could varify the prototypes performance just by looking at it. Why do you think Sukhoi intends to put the pak-fa through 2000 test flights? The designers themselves are not 100% sure about an aircraft's performance until they actually physically test it, and so far the pak-fa is exceeding expectations.

Serving air-born AESA, China yes, Russia No, this is the most evident to people have common sense.

And also according to your line of thinking, I can safely say Russia does not have any superior radar, aero, weapons etc if none of it existed

So in reality, Russia never had a pak-fa to show to China or any systems for the pak-fa, nor did they have any test data from the pak-fa, and the Chinese concluded that they had a superior aircraft? Keep believing those fairytales from 'insiders' or people at 'SAC'.

So who is more creditable?
A Russian defence enthusiast who reads on internet
Or
Those one who is developing real fighter jets like J-10, J-11B, J-15, J-16, J-20 and J-31?
I believe not long ago, people were still believing in those clueless Russian assumptions as ‘facts’ regarding Su-33 deal, arrestor, J-20, J-31 and China ‘buying’ T-50 and etc````

This is ignorance, if the pak-fa is just a flattened flanker then the J-20 is just a black J-10 with an extra vertical stabilizer. Why not just call the F-22 an upgraded F-15?
There is not one design feature on the pak-fa that is taken from a flanker, in terms of design the pak-fa has less in common with the flanker then the F-22 does with the F-15.

Erhhh``the two ‘suspending’ engine inlets?
I used colon marks on ‘flattened’ so don’t take it seriously``

 

[ptldM3]

Buying Russian Ka-31 and Ka-28 is only used as a backup.

What does that even mean? personal opinions are now facts? What would this 'backup' be for? In case China cant built an equivalent? Incase they can't meet manufacturing demand?

China was exporting AEW helicopters to Pakistan while purchasing AEW helicopters from Russia, so supply and demand can't be it. Logic tells us that they did it because the KA-31/28 were the better platform. No one is going to purchase expensive AEW helicopters if they are subpar.



Every time a Chinese member belittles Russian equipment ( which is daily) there is often an example of China purchasing the same equipment from Russia, the excuses are always 'we did it for political reasons' or 'we did it as backup'. Let's get real.

The main one AEW that will serve onboard CV-16 is domestic Z-8AEW which is more advance and powerful. Russian one which is more inferior will use in lesser important ship. Chinese always do things more precariously. You see US buy many foreign arms from Europe and Israel. Does it mean it is not capable of producing it? By doing it this way,it can reduce production cause and shorter development so that it can quickly mass equipped for lesser important unit.

Back it up. It's China that comes to Russia for AEW systems not the other way around, it also doesn't help that China was purchasing KA-31s and KA-28s from Russia While at the same time selling Pakistan the Z-9EC. And what chip are you talking, give me specifics with a link.

And also TK-10 prototypes is a non workable aircraft which is not able to use on carrier. This comment is comfirmed by Russian analysis. Buying TK-10 is irrelevant. Even without it, we will still able to make our own J-15. We just buy T-10K as a backup in case we really could not figure out making a carrier version of flanke. See J-15S which is a twin seater and never produced by Russian.

Be honest with yourself, China purchased the T-10 to copy, end of story.

May I know which prototype we use as reference since Russian itself never has a twin seater Su-33 version?

One prototype T-10 and production SU-30MKKs gave China the ability to build there J-11BS or whatever it's called.

Why don't we see the JH-7, which is much newer than the SU-27 being produced in numbers like we see flankers?

Firstly most of your comments are off topic and of little value, in fact they are passive aggressive. In the future I will not answer you if you continue to bring up topics that are none related and provocative. For now I will answer your comments but next time If you deviate from the topic I will not burden myself in replying to random topics.

Eeh, what? JH-7 is comparable to Su-24. It has nothing to do with Air-Superiority or Multi-role fighters. They are mostly used for bombing strikes against ground targets and supporting ground troops.

So the JH-7 is a close air support aircraft? I think not, at least not a true close air support. The SU-27 can also conduct bombing raids but it's not optimized for it, that job would be better suited for the SU-30 or better yet SU-34. So while we keep hearing that it's easy to produce airframes and Chinese are superior (so they claim) we still see the Chinese building there air force and Navy on a Russian platform which they could have just used the much newer JH-7. Heck they can just uses the same avionics that's in the Chinese flankers and put them in the JH-7 to accomplish the same role.

Just as RuAF did against Georgia in August 2008, and still lost several aircraft against a country such as Georgia.

What has this got to do with anything? Stay on topic. Half of those losses was to friendly fire and the remaining was relying to heavily on close air support aircraft instead of SEADs aircraft.

There is no point for PLAAF to sit with a large number of JH-7. PLAAF is producing 4th and 4.5 gen fighters and is focusing on 5th gen fighters and fighter-bombers, including a new type of JH-7 which is rumored to be on of the J-type series; J-16 or rumored J-18.

Exactly, they are focusing heavily on Flankers instead of the JH-7 which is a poor argument for Supposed Chinese superiority in designing aircraft.

Now, RuAF has around 25 units of newer Su-34. I mean, do you plan on sending Su-24 or the newer Su-34 against F-16, F-15, F-18, F-22 or F-35 ? No, I don't think RuAF plan on doing that. Neither does PLAAF plan on sending JH-7 up against F-16, F-15, etc etc.

The SU-34 is based on the SU-27, and it's primary role is SEADs. The SU-34 can also conduct air-to-air but it's not optimized for that role. If Sukhoi wanted to it could just use SU-35 avionics in the SU-34 but that would be a wast considering the SU-34 cockpit was designed for long endurance flights and other components such as landing gear, boom, ect were designed with SEADS. Nevertheless, the SU-34 can perform air-to-air because it still has a strong Flanker lineage.

So asking why PLAAF hasn't built more JH-7, is really a useless question. It's like asking why RuAF plan on building total of 120 Su-34 and not more than that. Which is about the same number of JH-7 PLAAF has in service right NOW and is looking to replace them gradually.

Hardly a worthless question, there are flanker variants that can perform any role, wether it be air superiority, multirole, maritime, or a bomb truck. The Flanker has much better flexibility then any JH-7, so there would be little need for the JH-7. In other words the Flanker is a superior platform and the Chinese air force recognizes this.

Furthermore, it would be like asking you; since T-50 is so "superior", why does Russia plan on building 1.000 of these fighters but only 200 are for the RuAF? The other 800 are going to other countries. 144 to India, and the rest to other countries.

Again off topic and a foolish example. The T-50 is going to be expensive. The JH-7 is not, nor is there anything to really augment the T-50 unlike the JH-7.

If we compare this with F-22, 100% are under U.S. control, and if we look at the F-35 number, the U.S. plan on having 80% of all produced F-35s, and only 20% will go to other countries.

First example, the F-22 is banned for export. The second example, the F-35 was originally supposed to be a cheap aircraft where the US military could afford to replace F-16s and F-15s, instead the F-35 has ballooned in price to where the US may cut orders just like partner countries have, some countries even dropped out of the F-35 program altogether.

However, China on the other hand, will most likely go the same way as the U.S. J-20s only for China and most of the J-31 will also be for PLAAF, and some will be exported, maybe 20-30% of the total numbers.

That's speculation which runs rampant among Chinese on this forum. Good example, Chinese AEW helicopters are superior to Russian ones because I say so, and the only reason we purchased those Russian helicopters was because of backup, no wait, it was because we replaced crappy Russian avionics, no it was a political statement, or wait it was as a favor to Russia.

So, another question; where is the second stealth fighter for RuAF ? Since RuAF plan on getting only 200 PAK-FA T-50.

Stay on topic, those figures of 200 could change anytime just like SU-34 numbers kept increasing.

Oh, is it imaginary MiG LMFS, which is still being developed in theory? lol. When is LMFS going to be ready? Do tell

When Mig says it's ready.

yet again off topic, may I add.

How is Russian Navy going these days? Oh, I guess straight down the hill from 2015, according to Russian admiral; although I don't need him to confirm what I already know, but it's fun linking to Russian sources, since many of you are in denial.

Russia losing it's navy:

Your link is from 2009 and it's like one paragraph long. Russia is spending over 650 billion on purchasing new military equipment including over 100 naval vessels. Russian shipyards have been delivering new frigates, corvettes, and submarines for the last few years and will continue so.

Again once again, it's completely off topic and low on your part.

More your assumption from your side, Russian media and rumor keep assuming that any China’s defence development must have to do with Russians.

It's called facts. Fact T-10 was purchased for the J-15 development. Fact J-11, J-15, ect are a copy of a flanker airframe. Fact Yakovlev assisted China. I can keep going.

Well tell you what, China went to Brazil for that matter. Because PLAN never wanted to learn their AC fleet and operation standards from Russia but western, and you know that western countries assisting China’s AC project is virtually impossible.

Brazil isnt considered 'western', we also have no proof that China didn't ask Russia. For all we know they did but Russia wasn't exactly thrilled at the prospect of training a navy that copied their aircraft design.

Your assumption is partially wrong again. China continues to develop flanker and its derivatives are because it’ easier to do on a familiar platform, and also, as I said it before, 300 strong flanker families are the backbone of PLAAF and PLAN

The Flanker may be familiar to China, but for China to spend as much money as it has on developing different variants of the flanker so it can continue to built up the flanker fleet to serve many decades tells you something about the flanker design.

China continues to built the flanker today and will do so for many more years, these flankers will serve decades. The J-20 and J-31 were designed with one thing in mind, the flanker was design with something else in mind, in other words just because China has the J-20 and J-31 does not mean that either of those aircraft are better then a flanker in terms of payload, range, maneuverability, and mission flexibility.

Again, China had none experience of building AW helis, buying those are for short cuts, you are over estimating the electronic warfare of Ka-31 or Ka-27. PLAAF and PLAN never wanted to rely their electronic warfare capability on Russians, but our indigenous Y-8 variants, Z-8 AW helis and Y-7 fixed-wing AC board AWACs, plus various electronic pods designed for JH-7, J-10 and Chinese Flanker variants.

China has helicopters foreign and domestic and China has an electronics industry, so why would it be difficult to put two and two together?

Besides your point is negated by the fact That china did have EW helicopter, in fact China was selling it's Z-9s to Pakistan while acquiring KA-31s and KA-28s.

Serving air-born AESA, China yes, Russia No, this is the most evident to people have common sense.

What difference does it make if it's airborne or ground based? Russia has AESA platforms for everything.

And also according to your line of thinking, I can safely say Russia does not have any superior radar, aero, weapons etc if none of it existed

You completely do not understand me. You gave an example of how China declined to participate in the pak-fa program by stating China had a superior design, superior radar, superior performance, ect. The problem is that the pak-fa didn't exist nor did any of it's avionics or weapons systems.

The fact that the aircraft didn't exist destroyed that fanboy rumor of 'we had superior design, 'superior radar', 'superior weapons'.

So who is more creditable?
A Russian defence enthusiast who reads on internet
Or
Those one who is developing real fighter jets like J-10, J-11B, J-15, J-16, J-20 and J-31?
I believe not long ago, people were still believing in those clueless Russian assumptions as ‘facts’ regarding Su-33 deal, arrestor, J-20, J-31 and China ‘buying’ T-50 and etc````

What is more logical, believing someone (if they are real) that they have a superior design when the design that they are talking about does not exist or believing someone's bullcrap?

The pak-fa rumor spung around by Chinese fanboys is like Ford claiming that by 2020 they they have a better car then Ferrari, yet Ford knows nothing about how the 2020 Ferrari will perform.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

You compare the latest russian equipment thats coming and there is no comparison.
Only chinese members believe china is more advanced than russia.j-20 is mig1.44 knockoff with modifications.Needs russian engine or won't be any good at all with subpar performance.And people comparing radar tech of russians with chinese.Russia building radar from 50's lol.Chinese just started a few decades back.
Compare the design principle of the upcoming armata withe the latest ZTZ-99 with its flawed turret geometry and u'll know who's ahead in making tanks as well.
Comapre the new stereguschy class corvettes with type 56 corvettes or yasen class SSN with chinese super noisy SSNs and u'll know who's ahead i naval tech.
Chinese drooling in this thread has been funny though.
Just like they declared carrier killer DF-21 operational after 1 test hitting a static large carrier size target in gobi desert,lol.Thats chinese standard of reliability.
Compare chinese tank design philiosophy that is clearly that of a novice with russian or western ones and u get the difference.
Throw in iskander,topol-m,s-500 and u know who calls the shots among china,russia in missile tech.

 

[armchairPrivate]

China just signed a $270B oil deal with Russia. China has paid $60-70B up front. I think that should take care of the trade imbalance. There is no need for China to buy any jet fighters from the Ruskies, I don't think.

 

[Beast]

What does that even mean? personal opinions are now facts? What would this 'backup' be for? In case China cant built an equivalent? Incase they can't meet manufacturing demand?

China was exporting AEW helicopters to Pakistan while purchasing AEW helicopters from Russia, so supply and demand can't be it. Logic tells us that they did it because the KA-31/28 were the better platform. No one is going to purchase expensive AEW helicopters if they are subpar.



Every time a Chinese member belittles Russian equipment ( which is daily) there is often an example of China purchasing the same equipment from Russia, the excuses are always 'we did it for political reasons' or 'we did it as backup'. Let's get real.








Back it up. It's China that comes to Russia for AEW systems not the other way around, it also doesn't help that China was purchasing KA-31s and KA-28s from Russia While at the same time selling Pakistan the Z-9EC. And what chip are you talking, give me specifics with a link.








Be honest with yourself, China purchased the T-10 to copy, end of story.








One prototype T-10 and production SU-30MKKs gave China the ability to build there J-11BS or whatever







So the JH-7 is a close air support aircraft? I think not, at least not a true close air support. The SU-27 can also conduct bombing raids but it's not optimized for it, that job would be better suited for the SU-30 or better yet SU-34. So while we keep hearing that it's easy to produce airframes and Chinese are superior (so they claim) we still see the Chinese building there air force and Navy on a Russian platform which they could have just used the much newer JH-7. Heck they can just uses the same avionics that's in the Chinese flankers and put them in the JH-7 to accomplish the same role.
















The SU-34 is based on the SU-27, and it's primary role

















That's speculation which runs rampant among Chinese on this forum. Good example, Chinese AEW helicopters are superior to Russian ones because I say so, and the only reason we purchased those Russian helicopters was because of backup, no wait, it was because we replaced crappy Russian avionics, no it was a political statement, or wait it was as a favor to

















It's called facts. Fact T-10 was purchased for the J-15 development. Fact J-11, J-15, ect are a copy of a flanker

More like you can't accept the reality of inferior Russian AEW. You are so insistent on KA-31 and KA-28 purchase of yr proof china needed then explain to me why the Z-8AEW is still developed?

I give you an example. When China is building the beidou II system, China purchase the atomic clock system from Switzerland. The Europe are convinced the China beidou II system will be inferior or even end up not working. Nver they know China manage to produce its own atomic clock with much superior spec. Buying the Switzerland clock is only a backup plan. It never intend to install on Chinese beidou II.

If China never build a Z-8AEW, I will buy yr explanation. And the fact, Russia now do not allow China just to buy one or two unit. So China needs to buy a few system to get clearance. All this inferior KA-31 will just end up in smaller unit and serving lesser important squadron. The more superior Z-8AEW will based onboard liaonging.

As for T-10, even without it. We will still able to make our own J-15. Again, the Chinese has plenty of Chinese. We can easily afford this kind of purchase to double ensure the program will progress smoothly even if one failed.
Tell me, twin seat J-15S copy from which Russia prototype?

Don't tell me you are one of those naive to tell me just added another seat on a existing aircraft and is as simple as that?
Only layman with no basic military knowledge will say that.

 

[ptldM3]

More like you can't accept the reality of inferior Russian AEW. You are so insistent on KA-31 and KA-28 purchase of yr proof china needed then explain to me why the Z-8AEW is still developed?

I give you an example. When China is building the beidou II system, China purchase the atomic clock system from Switzerland. The Europe are convinced the China beidou II system will be inferior or even end up not working. Nver they know China manage to produce its own atomic clock with much superior spec. Buying the Switzerland clock is only a backup plan. It never intend to install on Chinese beidou II.

Long story short, you cant prove that the Z-8 is superior to the KA-31. You can't back your claim about the the superior Chinese 'chip'. Next time spare us your rant, it contains nothing of substance nor does it prove anything.

If China never build a Z-8AEW, I will buy yr explanation. And the fact, Russia now do not allow China just to buy one or two unit. So China needs to buy a few system to get clearance. All this inferior KA-31 will just end up in smaller unit and serving lesser important squadron. The more superior Z-8AEW will based onboard liaonging.

On the contrary, It can be argued that the Z-8 AEW version has barrowed or stolen elements from the KA-31. After all the Chinese military has an apauling record of blatantly copying, breaching contracts, and hacking. And there is good reason why Russia does not allow China to purchase just one or two of anything because China has a history of copying.

As for T-10, even without it. We will still able to make our own J-15. Again, the Chinese has plenty of Chinese. We can easily afford this kind of purchase to double ensure the program will progress smoothly even if one failed.
Tell me, twin seat J-15S copy from which Russia prototype?

I already did. The Chinese have SU-30MKKs which are twin seater aircraft, and the Chinese have the T-10 which is an SU-33 prototype.

Need I say more?

Don't tell me you are one of those naive to tell me just added another seat on a existing aircraft and is as simple as that?
Only layman with no basic military knowledge will say that.

No they didn't just add another seat. The design of the J-15s (front fuselage particularly) is identical to any other SU-30, there is nothing that deviates from the SU-30 meaning they simply copied the SU-30s front fuselage design. Designers and engineers that copied the T-10 and SU30MKK should have no problem incorporating the front fuselage of the SU-30 into the J-15.

 

[Beast]

Long story short, you cant prove that the Z-8 is superior to the KA-31. You can't back your claim about the the superior Chinese 'chip'. Next time spare us your rant, it contains nothing of substance nor does it prove anything.







On the contrary, It can be argued that the Z-8 AEW version has barrowed or stolen elements from the KA-31. After all the Chinese military has an apauling record of blatantly copying, breaching contracts, and hacking. And there is good reason why Russia does not allow China to purchase just one or two of anything because China has a history of copying.






I already did. The Chinese have SU-30MKKs which are twin seater aircraft, and the Chinese have the T-10 which is an SU-33 prototype.

Need I say more?





No they didn't just add another seat. The design of the J-15s (front fuselage particularly) is identical to any other SU-30, there is nothing that deviates from the SU-30 meaning they simply copied the SU-30s front fuselage design. Designers and engineers that copied the T-10 and SU30MKK should have no problem incorporating the front fuselage of the SU-30 into the J-15.

Lol. In fact, its you who need to back up your claim. If KA-31 is superior why bother to make to make Z-8AEW? Just buy more and get the job done?

And you are stupid to suggest Su-30MKK is similiar to J-15S. Do you stupidly forget j-15S with canard is built to suit for carrier ops? While Su-30MKK has no canard? Or you are going to use yr layman term to say, jut add a pair of canards and the plane will still fly perfectly?
China has no canard twin seater plane to model on. It needs to redesign and get the wind tunnel test by itself.

This more it less show what kind of credibility you have for commenting about military stuff.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Z-8 is nothing more than french super frelon built under chinese name,chinese army rejected this for russian mi-17v.

 

[wangwei11607]

Rational thinking you've lost
Calm talk more results