What's new

J-20 vs. F-35, One Analyst’s Perspective

What the hell does a turbofan engine have to do with low observable profile or sensors? Been drinking too much of the american kool aid?

just an analogy my dear dont take it personal. I think only an engine that is fitting for a 5th gen plane will suffice e.g. one that gives it super cruise without having to engage after burners (a much publiced feature of F22)

I will like to be proven wrong..but given the problems China has had with its own basic components of military machines (the abandoned Z-10 copter because west refused to sell components, I have seen the BBC program where the investigation team was claiming to have dashed Chinese efforts to bypass the military embargo and use indirect channels to procure the items to make the plan, then the engine issue of JF-17 pretty much brought the whole project to deadend when Russians haulted/ put conditions over the use of RD-93).

so my comment was not out of malice.. surely you will have a better insight so I will be looking forward to a good video from you once the plane makes its flight in the near future.

by the way.. I wont drink American "kool" aid.. I would use it to increase our knowlege and share it with friends.. I hope you know who ;)
all power to china
 
.
Right now is hard to challenge US, however Russia is 2 decades behind US in the aerospace industry, so it is not that hard to surpass them.

Don't be a Chinese Power Ranger, you haven’t the slightest clue about Russian technology and you proved that previously, nor do have any business talking about anything related to aerospace. As for your comment about Russia being easy to surpass, this is fan boy talk. Russia has decades of experience by trial and error, has invested and is currently investing billions into projects, and has experienced designers and engineers. If it was so easy for China to surpass Russia they would not ask Russia for help in developing radars, nor would China need Russian engines for the J-10 and JF-17 and they certainly would not have a need to purchase systems from the Severnoye Design Bureau than reverse engineering them on the 054 frigate. There are many more examples but my point is clear. It should also be noted that even US specialist were suprised at how advanced some Russian technology was, like i mentioned earlier NASA was so impressed by Russian propulsion that they purchased engines for the Atlas, something i previously told you.
 
.
Don't be a Chinese Power Ranger, you haven’t the slightest clue about Russian technology and you proved that previously, nor do have any business talking about anything related to aerospace. As for your comment about Russia being easy to surpass, this is fan boy talk. Russia has decades of experience by trial and error, has invested and is currently investing billions into projects, and has experienced designers and engineers. If it was so easy for China to surpass Russia they would not ask Russia for help in developing radars, nor would China need Russian engines for the J-10 and JF-17 and they certainly would not have a need to purchase systems from the Severnoye Design Bureau than reverse engineering them on the 054 frigate. There are many more examples but my point is clear. It should also be noted that even US specialist were suprised at how advanced some Russian technology was, like i mentioned earlier NASA was so impressed by Russian propulsion that they purchased engines for the Atlas, something i previously told you.

Don't be a Russian power ranger. Russia is past its glory days and will need place like India to pay for its R&D and when China is going off the teat in the near future/sucked you dry for usable tech (that day is coming), it's going to out sale you in your current markets in places like S. America and Africa.

Please.... Don't pretend you're less of a hardware fanboy than anyone else.
 
.
Don't be a Russian power ranger. Russia is past its glory days and will need place like India to pay for its R&D and when China is going off the teat in the near future/sucked you dry for usable tech (that day is coming), it's going to out sale you in your current markets in places like S. America and Africa.

Even though India is Russia's biggest customer it makes up just a small percent of total sales. Your theory of China outselling Russia is at best wishful thinking, in recent times Russia has expanded its clientele to even include NATO countries such as Greece, they even sold weapons to South Korea. Even Russia's state owned arms exporter, Rosoboronexport has seen record sales. As for China sucking Russia dry for usable tech this is also a fan boy claim, there are some systems that are simply not for sale, nor will Russia want to give away it's latest technology, even during the Soviet times Warsaw pact countries received downgraded weapons, such as no data-link in the Mig-29's.
 
.
Even though India is Russia's biggest customer it makes up just a small percent of total sales. Your theory of China outselling Russia is at best wishful thinking, in recent times Russia has expanded its clientele to even include NATO countries such as Greece, they even sold weapons to South Korea. Even Russia's state owned arms exporter, Rosoboronexport has seen record sales. As for China sucking Russia dry for usable tech this is also a fan boy claim, there are some systems that are simply not for sale, nor will Russia want to give away it's latest technology, even during the Soviet times Warsaw pact countries received downgraded weapons, such as no data-link in the Mig-29's.

Jesus wept....

in recent times Russia has expanded its clientele to even include NATO countries such as Greece, they even sold weapons to South Korea.

China out selling Russia in developing countries is a far more plausible scenerio than Russia out-selling the US in NATO countries. Tell me what token low budget item did Greece and SK buy?

Another point you fail to comprehend is how tied to economic links the arms trade is. Economic ties are bargaining chips for arms contract negotiations, and Russia just doesn't have economic reach in the world markets.

there are some systems that are simply not for sale, nor will Russia want to give away it's latest technology,

Ok they are not for sale, so what? Russia is holding on to a diminishing lead. There will come a day, the world has moved on and Russia is running in place. Sure You can hope that India keep buying your arms like a crack addict hooked on crack, fueling your weapons R&D instead of their own, but even a crack addict realizes at one point that they need to drop the habit. Technology advantage is fueled by the economy underlying it and this is why Russia went from rough parity with the US to having no hope of catching up the US again. Face it, Russia was castrated as an economic power when the USSR fell.
 
Last edited:
.
In fact, CCP only looks up at the US technology nowadays as the benchmark, Russia is not even close.
 
.
In fact, CCP only looks up at the US technology nowadays as the benchmark, Russia is not even close.

Whatever I'm not saying the Russia doesn't still retain a lead from its cold war effort but that was 20 years ago, and that lead is steadily eroding. It's time to face up and stop the fan boy delusions.
 
.
Whatever I'm not saying the Russia doesn't still retain a lead from its cold war effort but that was 20 years ago, and that lead is steadily eroding. It's time to face up and stop the fan boy delusions.

Russia tech is ok, but China is now looking at higher standard which is US.

So, China's goal is US, not Russia.
 
.
just an analogy my dear dont take it personal. I think only an engine that is fitting for a 5th gen plane will suffice e.g. one that gives it super cruise without having to engage after burners (a much publiced feature of F22)

I will like to be proven wrong..but given the problems China has had with its own basic components of military machines (the abandoned Z-10 copter because west refused to sell components, I have seen the BBC program where the investigation team was claiming to have dashed Chinese efforts to bypass the military embargo and use indirect channels to procure the items to make the plan, then the engine issue of JF-17 pretty much brought the whole project to deadend when Russians haulted/ put conditions over the use of RD-93).

so my comment was not out of malice.. surely you will have a better insight so I will be looking forward to a good video from you once the plane makes its flight in the near future.

by the way.. I wont drink American "kool" aid.. I would use it to increase our knowlege and share it with friends.. I hope you know who ;)
all power to china

You know what was the problem with the Z-10? Engines. Not the sensors, the weapons, or anything, but the engines. And it isn't not enough thurst, it's our engines have a ridiculously short lifetime, something like 50 hours between each overhaul vs. 500 for the AL-31. If you have been paying attention to the Zhuhai exhibits, our non-engine technology is not bad at all. Sensors

CAIC WZ-10 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And WZ-10 apparently has not been scrapped, but is under evaluation.
 
.
You know what was the problem with the Z-10? Engines. Not the sensors, the weapons, or anything, but the engines. And it isn't not enough thurst, it's our engines have a ridiculously short lifetime, something like 50 hours between each overhaul vs. 500 for the AL-31. If you have been paying attention to the Zhuhai exhibits, our non-engine technology is not bad at all. Sensors

CAIC WZ-10 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And WZ-10 apparently has not been scrapped, but is under evaluation.

For now, TH engine has a longer lifespan than AL-31. Otherwise, it would be an utter embarassment to honor these engineers if they can't even manage to build something better than 1970-1980s Soviet tech.
 
.
China out selling Russia in developing countries is a far more plausible scenerio than Russia out-selling the US in NATO countries. Tell me what token low budget item did Greece and SK buy?


Russia has contacts everywhere. A country that already uses Russian technology would make life difficult for themselves if they switched vendors; firstly, it would be a logistical problem, aircraft such as the JF-17 would involve a third party-- Russia, than comes the challenge of familiarizing and training with new weapons, in terms of arms export Russia is one of the largest and offers some extremely competitive systems and reasonable prices, overtaking Russia would be an up hill battles filled with landmines, barbed wire and snipers.

Even countries such as Algeria have purchased 180 T-90's from Russia, and don't get me started with the SU-30's popularity and reputation.

As for "low budget item(s)" Russia has sold items such as S-300's which aren’t cheap and BMP's, just to name a few.



Another point you fail to comprehend is how tied to economic links arms trade is. Economic ties are bargaining chips for arms contract negotiations, and Russia has nowhere near the economic reach of China in the world markets.



Ok they are not for sale, so what? Russia is holding on to a diminishing lead. Technology advantage is fueled by the economy underlying it. Russia being largely castrated as an economic power when the USSR fell, has no hope of catching up the US again.

I was waiting for you to say this (this is also important for ChineseTiger to read), most fields in Russian technology has actually advanced faster after the fall of the Soviet Union. For instance, for decades Russian engines has poor TBO time between overhauls and low service lives, now the standard is 1,000 hours TBO's and 4,000 hours service lives and this number is expected to increase on newer engines, Russian engines have also grew in sophistication, such as metallurgy and digital control systems that supersedes everything before it by a large margin. The same applies for countless other fields such as radars.

There are many reasons for such advances; firstly, there are now free enterprises in Russia, many of these companies work with foreign countries, thus they gather experience and apply it to various programs, remember something such as an aircraft can have dozens or hundreds of subcontractors providing everything from software, to engines and ejection seats, to machining, Russia is growing in many aspects, including software, and Russia has many bargaining chips and they have used them, does Israel not ring a bell? The mere fact that Russia is such an important weapons exporter has caused Israel to rethink its policies and even sell Russia weapons. Russia has also threatened to cut off fuel supplies to get what it wants.

It is also no surprise that American companies have sold powerful computers to Russian arms companies for incorporation in military hardware. Further, even Boeing and many other major international arms companies have good relationship with Russia and Russian companies. Companies such as Boeing even have Russian design headquarters and have publicly stated how important Russia is for sales, they were even kind enough to act as advisors for the Sukhoi 100 so it could get international certification other companies such as Thales were involved as well. Speaking of Thales, France has not been hesitant in selling Russia some of their latest technology such as jammers ect, and that's fine with us since there is always something that can be learned, even Israel is now selling to Russia, and again this is more than fine with us. I remember Israel stopped selling technology to China because of US protest but this has not been a problem for Russia. In the end Russia has established companies with decades of expertise as well as many smaller companies that are growing, an expanding IT sector is also important but Russia's biggest strength has been it diplomacy and smarts, look at all the foreign companies that are more than willing to do business in Russia.

As far as people talking about Russia not setting bench marks, clearly this demonstrates a lack of knowledge, I could write a book on some of the latest weapons and technology that has emerged from Russia, and sadly I would only know a small fraction of the weapons capabilities. I do suggest some research, Russia has set the benchmark for many systems such as supercalvitating torpedoes and HMC, soon the S-500 will re-right SAMS. Also research what many specialists have said about Russian weapons. They were more sophisticated than expected and in some cases found to be superior, even though popular belief said otherwise.
 
Last edited:
. .
^^^^^

If that what your russian hardware nerd fanboy site said?

Here's the one number that matter
World Bank, World Development Indicators - Google public data

wah wah wah...

PDHeadInSand.gif


According to Mr.Putin, the collapse of USSR was the biggest tragedy, nuff to say.....
 
.
^^^^

If that what your russian hardware nerd fanboy site said?

Here's the one number that matter
World Bank, World Development Indicators - Google public data

wah wah wah...




Love the fan boy pep talk though. Big :tup:

The GDP took a hit during the economic crisis much like other countries, than again it has risen in 2010, this, however, is irrelevant, and nothing more than a cheap shot. Even in the 1990's when Russia was at its lowest most companies continued their progress and as a result you see the fruits of their labor.

My previous post has debunked some of the misconceptions you and other Chinese on this forum share, in any case your above post shows defeat, instead of diverging from the subject and being disrespectful you could have challenged me.
 
Last edited:
.
I just don't see the critical part. A lot of the so called "points" on this article is what you would call "fanboy speculation".
Yes there are and they are not speculation. They are legitimate questions on whether the J-20 has the necessary built-in capabilities to integrate with the larger organism. Aboulafia is not saying the J-20 does not, but neither did he said it does. He is questioning if it is capable.

For example...

6. Powerful engines (ideally capable of supercruise), with a high mean time between overhaul and failures.

Someone here said that the highlighted is unimportant as China is not seeking conflicts that are long duration. This revealed a flawed understanding of the need for reliability in mechanical equipments no matter how sophisticated they might be. Who will benefit the most from an engine design that will require an overhaul in the tens of hours? The maintenance crew. But are they the ones who will be doing the fighting? No.

The questions posed by Aboulafia are legitimate based upon his experience in aviation. They are not 'anti' anything.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom