China's J-15 Carrier-Based Fighter is Inferior to Russian Su-33 fighter: Russia

[rcrmj]

I don't have to.

your 20 year old argument holds no water. J-10s are brand new, yet I know for a fact they wouldn't survive 5 minutes in the air against F-16s blk 30. which are also 20 years old now.

if you cannot see how having a license does not mean your fabrication processes are also up to scratch then...

see you avoiding the argument``licencsed production is licenced production has nothing to do with copy, J-7 is a copy of Mig-21 as China never got license to produce Mig-21 from russia``but China got license to produce S-27 with its own designation of J-11, solid fact, i dpnt know where did you come up the idea that its a copy`?

and your childish argument of J-10 cannot stand 5 mins against F-16 is even lighter than the air, pure ignorant assumption.

 

[Speeder 2]

I don't have to.

your 20 year old argument holds no water. J-10s are brand new, yet I know for a fact they wouldn't survive 5 minutes in the air against F-16s blk 30. which are also 20 years old now.

if you cannot see how having a license does not mean your fabrication processes are also up to scratch then...

I see your point.

manufacturing tech (steel making, material science, molding, precision machinaries, etc. general tech for putting an airframe together)have grown by leaps and bounds in the last 20 years. even there is a difference, sometimes, between a licenced production and original manufactuer, it doesn't neccesarily mean the latter is superior -- which both you and Ruski press officers have falsely assumed.

whereas hindustan licened production (highlighted by 2++ or 3 ++ gen tejas) is totally another matter thanks to its bronze age era industry, oke oke, stone age to be fair, whenever it deals with chinese licened productions (for millitary usage, not 1$ store slippers) however, the overall quality is usually high, if not even higher than its original russian makers. this is underpined by china's massively improved industrial might and manufacturing knowhow vís-a-vís russia's as we see today.

.

 

[amalakas]

OK, let me break it down for you one by one ---

There's no issue with J-11A here, copy or not I don't care, and you don't want to know. It's J-11B on the line of analysis here.

Apart from sharing a common airframe, J-11B and Su27 are two different breeds of animals for having drastically different "interiors"( avionics, elecs., materials, etc).

Now if you can't make a concret case , as you haven't yet, that 20-year-old Su 27 has "some areas" in its general airframe that are too advanced for the Chinese to "copy" 20 years later, making it overall a more capable plane than J-11B depite of its clearly inferior "interiors", then your whole logic falls apart. Thus you'll be forced to admit that by and large up-to-date J-11B is superior to Su-27, probably much superior still.

Granted that F-16E/F vs. F-16A/B was my lazy analogy, yet it's not far-fetched. Now take this -

- if amalakas01 is superior to Camel01, and
-if amalakas02 is much more superior to amalakas01, and
-if Camel 02 is slightly , if any, superior to Camel 01,

So, do you think amalakas02 is inferior to Camel02?

see, this is the beauty of inference, which doesn't require knowing exact details of things in order to get them right....let me know when you're ready so that I can grab my popcorn... but by all means take your time


As for the Euro deal, don't argue with me on finance, ever, as it's my cup of tea, oke?

There's a thing called "funding", which the EU just can't solve by plugging in the printing press. China is the ONLY one on this planet to be able to fund the significant part of the deal so that it could go thru at the end of the day. Otherwise there is no realistic point to discuss the rescue deal in the first place if knowing that China won't be part of it beforehand, is it? Whatever spins the media may tell you to make you believe, the ultimate fate of Euro is in the hands of China now. Say Good Morning to your Chinese overlord.

I think your reasoning is wrong.

First of all you keep referring to a 20 year old plane, implying that the passage of time simply allows for a better plane to be build ..because ... time passed.
it isn't so. I made a clear comment that more is in play when it comes to making an aircraft than simply addition of years and generations of avionics.
And here is where you lack of experience in the military which i have served extensively as an engineer tells me that there is a lot about planes you don't get.
Even planes that have parts made in different fabrication plants have issues with quality not being the same overall.
You are obviously hung up on the whole ''time has passed'' hence the plane must be better... it can be, but there is no guarantee that it is.

And as for your chinese baillout thing .. i don't think you are as strong in your area as you think you are. .. re examine things, or your newspapers tell you different stories..

 

[amalakas]

see you avoiding the argument``licencsed production is licenced production has nothing to do with copy, J-7 is a copy of Mig-21 as China never got license to produce Mig-21 from russia``but China got license to produce S-27 with its own designation of J-11, solid fact, i dpnt know where did you come up the idea that its a copy`?

and your childish argument of J-10 cannot stand 5 mins against F-16 is even lighter than the air, pure ignorant assumption.

No it isn't .. not really. You have no idea what the operational capabilities of fighter planes are and your approach on how good something is is based on how good it looks and how recently it was made.

I can also tell you that the brand new J-10 would be blown out of the sky by 46 year old F-4 AUP phantoms.

The phantoms I am talking about have this capability documented by countless NATO exercises.. what does the J-10 have to back it up.

p.s. that doesn't mean it's a bad plane, i am just pointing the obvious, that things you don't know you don't hype.

 

[Obambam]

No it isn't .. not really. You have no idea what the operational capabilities of fighter planes are and your approach on how good something is is based on how good it looks and how recently it was made.

I can also tell you that the brand new J-10 would be blown out of the sky by 46 year old F-4 AUP phantoms.

The phantoms I am talking about have this capability documented by countless NATO exercises.. what does the J-10 have to back it up.

p.s. that doesn't mean it's a bad plane, i am just pointing the obvious, that things you don't know you don't hype.

Any credible third party source my friend?

 

[amalakas]

Not from my PDA.. if you have access to a proper PC look up F4 AUP modernisation program and what it did for the operational capability of the plane.

 

[Obambam]

Not from my PDA.. if you have access to a proper PC look up F4 AUP modernisation program and what it did for the operational capability of the plane.

That's not what I was asking for. I am interested specifically in how the F4 AUP would blow the J-10's out of the sky. Not paper specs and videos of the plane flying around with max weapon loads etc.

 

[muse]

Free advice to all who have been arguing that J15 is not "inferior" - please accept the advantage that your adversaries offer you when they underestimate you

 

[Jungibaaz]

I can also tell you that the brand new J-10 would be blown out of the sky by 46 year old F-4 AUP phantoms.

in deed... do pigs fly in this world too?
if so then please go ahead and present some sort of an argument....

good luck!

 

[amalakas]

That's not what I was asking for. I am interested specifically in how the F4 AUP would blow the J-10's out of the sky. Not paper specs and videos of the plane flying around with max weapon loads etc.

Right, on my PDA, I have no data with me, if you are interested in a starting point though, you might be interested to start with the equipment on the F-4 AUP.

it has new enhanced IFF, the APG-65, new combat mission computer, AiM-120c5, and IRIS-T missiles, and new jammers and self protection suit. it can carry 10 AiM 120s and 4 Iris-T which it can also use as IRST sensors.

 

[Donation]

Korotchenko said China was unlikely to solve technical problems related to the design of the folding wings

Cool Article, Cool Analyst.

 

[Beast]

This thread shall also close. I think china did offer Russia J-15 plus the twin seater version J-15BS. If both Russia and china share the same plane for their carrier. It will significantly bring down per unit price.

 

[rcrmj]

Right, on my PDA, I have no data with me, if you are interested in a starting point though, you might be interested to start with the equipment on the F-4 AUP.

it has new enhanced IFF, the APG-65, new combat mission computer, AiM-120c5, and IRIS-T missiles, and new jammers and self protection suit. it can carry 10 AiM 120s and 4 Iris-T which it can also use as IRST sensors.

give me a WWII pistol fully loaded, I can effectively 'destroy' F-22 with few blows```

your childish assumption and simpleton really amussing

 

[jhungary]

give me a WWII pistol fully loaded, I can effectively 'destroy' F-22 with few blows```

your childish assumption and simpleton really amussing

Of course you can, if you stand next to a parked F-22 with wing fuel fill-up cap open, you can probably destroy the F-22 in just a few shot.

Anyway, reverse engineer or copying aside, do bear in mind J-15 is 201x technology verus Su-33 which stop developing after 2000, which you just cannot compare, same as comparing a F/A-18A and a F-4.....Cannot be done.

 

[帅的一匹]

another flame bait thread....make nonsense at all