What's new

Now that is a surprise, If I ever saw one. Chinese "Moskit"

Russians must be proud Chinese are infringing on it's niche of ram-jet powered cruise missiles.
surprise it took you all this long to develop your own this is really 60's era tech with a modern seeker.

I <3 Shipwreck :smitten:
 
. .
Anything about cost of such system. I read somewhere that one Brahmos cost 3 to 4 million
 
.
True, it doesn't help to say this or that is a copy, one simply has to admit that it's amazing what Chinas industrial power can achieve. BUT, that the constant copy approach also tells us something about Chinas actual development and design capability doesn't it?


Copied from whom ? China never acquire any P-800 or Barhmos. Do you believe the hype that China is capable of copying anything by just look at the picture of the those things intended to copy ?
 
.
Shameless cheerleading going on :D
Good going,maybe master will do some favour and dump it in your country.
 
.
Almost 10 years of "BrahMos" frustration can be seen on this thread hahahahahah :D :D By the time this thing comes to pakistan we will have Hypersonic BrahMos ready :D
 
.
Each is designed for a different usage and deployment tactic.

And that's what I agreed to, but the media hype and the claims around CM400 did not stated that, but claimed it to be equal or similar to P800, but that wouldn't create a need for a copy.

The CX-1 is a rather neat solution to the need for a terra firma launched supersonic system...
What makes you believe that it's not intended for sub launched anti ship use, similar to the P800?

The need to copy designs.

But why is there a need to do so many copies? The lack of innovation and R&D capability. The US are huge in defence spending and industrial capability and still there are smaller countries like Israel, Sweden or Germany that show similar or even more innovations with far less spending. So being able to produce something similar, doesn't automatically mean you could have developed something similar on your own. Take J11 as an example, a good copy of the Su 27, but that doesn't gave China the capability to further develop it similar to Su34 or 35s did it? Having build J11 versions later and J10, didn't gave China the capability to develop own NG fighter designs either. The most innovative feature might be the SR missile bay, which clearly shows that they have developed it with certain aims behind it and not only copied from what they saw somewhere else. But exactly this kind of own innovation and R&D is still at low level compared to the defence spending at least, while the ammount of copies is very high.
 
.
Hope we see some test videos,otherwise looking at this dummy,its just another CM 400AKG sooper dooper Nimitz Killer :P
 
.
Russians must be proud Chinese are infringing on it's niche of ram-jet powered cruise missiles.
surprise it took you all this long to develop your own this is really 60's era tech with a modern seeker.

I <3 Shipwreck :smitten:

Better late than never :dance3:
 
.
Copied from whom ? China never acquire any P-800 or Barhmos. Do you believe the hype that China is capable of copying anything by just look at the picture of the those things intended to copy ?

Well I guess China never acutally procured an F35, F22, F117 either and still we know that several parts of even mock ups of them exist, so lets leave that a side. I even admire that capability of the Chinese industry, I'm just saying that it has a reason why it is "needed" and why it isn't just a choice.
 
. .
Almost 10 years of "BrahMos" frustration can be seen on this thread hahahahahah :D :D By the time this thing comes to pakistan we will have Hypersonic BrahMos ready :D

And for over 10 years, have Indians made any meanfull used of this "BrahMos" beside use it to bragg in the Internet? now it will be a frustration that you guys can not longer use it to troll in any defend thread because we have also an anti-troll weapon call CX-1.
 
.
But why is there a need to do so many copies? The lack of innovation and R&D capability. The US are huge in defence spending and industrial capability and still there are smaller countries like Israel, Sweden or Germany that show similar or even more innovations with far less spending. So being able to produce something similar, doesn't automatically mean you could have developed something similar on your own. Take J11 as an example, a good copy of the Su 27, but that doesn't gave China the capability to further develop it similar to Su34 or 35s did it? Having build J11 versions later and J10, didn't gave China the capability to develop own NG fighter designs either. The most innovative feature might be the SR missile bay, which clearly shows that they have developed it with certain aims behind it and not only copied from what they saw somewhere else. But exactly this kind of own innovation and R&D is still at low level compared to the defence spending at least, while the ammount of copies is very high.

This isn't an attack, but look at your personal experience, Tejas, Kavari engine, that tank, trainer jets, even ships and submarines to go with the Attack helicopter.

As of this moment only the ship, Kolkata is out, I won't judge how good it is here, but even with Western tech it took 10 years, and I have to say building a ship is the easiest of the bunch.


Can China make those weapons at this time? Maybe, but the difference is way too big, if we want to catch up playing "fair" it would literally take 100 years, cause the Americans are not standing still, in fact they are moving at a blistering pace.

Look at it this way, you got Kolkata, we got 52D, and the Americans have Zumwalt, even out 055 isn't a match for that. You got the Vikrant carrier, we got 001A, and the Americans have Ford class, you got nothing, we got nothing, and the Americans have Osprey.


Lastly while you say copy,and they are, but the blue prints wasn't exactly handed to us, and on the off chance that we do have it, we still need to study it.

Now that has created a generation of engineers with a wealth of experience working on a host of projects, this can be passed onto the next generation.

Why is this important? The first generation of engineers had helicopter models when they started, today's new engineers have dozens of helicopters, various models, and the senior engineers to lead them through the process.


J-11 and J-10? Led to J-20 and J-31, I'm not sure it's 100% our own design, but it's far closer to 100% than any of the previous generation.


Oh and Sweden and Germany? Aside from the fact they have American tech, they lack tons of expertise across a lot of fields, what exactly can the Swedes do, other than that fighter and a couple of guns. Nothing. They don't have our ability for 5th gen fighter, hypersonic missiles, tanks, heavy transports, engines, and any of the other 1000 fields that the military needs to function properly.
 
.
This isn't an attack, but look at your personal experience, Tejas, Kavari engine, that tank, trainer jets, even ships and submarines to go with the Attack helicopter.

As of this moment only the ship, Kolkata is out, I won't judge how good it is here, but even with Western tech it took 10 years, and I have to say building a ship is the easiest of the bunch.


Can China make those weapons at this time? Maybe, but the difference is way too big, if we want to catch up playing "fair" it would literally take 100 years, cause the Americans are not standing still, in fact they are moving at a blistering pace.

Look at it this way, you got Kolkata, we got 52D, and the Americans have Zumwalt, even out 055 isn't a match for that. You got the Vikrant carrier, we got 001A, and the Americans have Ford class, you got nothing, we got nothing, and the Americans have Osprey.


Lastly while you say copy,and they are, but the blue prints wasn't exactly handed to us, and on the off chance that we do have it, we still need to study it.

Now that has created a generation of engineers with a wealth of experience working on a host of projects, this can be passed onto the next generation.

Why is this important? The first generation of engineers had helicopter models when they started, today's new engineers have dozens of helicopters, various models, and the senior engineers to lead them through the process.


J-11 and J-10? Led to J-20 and J-31, I'm not sure it's 100% our own design, but it's far closer to 100% than any of the previous generation.


Oh and Sweden and Germany? Aside from the fact they have American tech, they lack tons of expertise across a lot of fields, what exactly can the Swedes do, other than that fighter and a couple of guns. Nothing. They don't have our ability for 5th gen fighter, hypersonic missiles, tanks, heavy transports, engines, and any of the other 1000 fields that the military needs to function properly.

Well said! <3
 
.
And that's what I agreed to, but the media hype and the claims around CM400 did not stated that, but claimed it to be equal or similar to P800, but that wouldn't create a need for a copy.


What makes you believe that it's not intended for sub launched anti ship use, similar to the P800?



But why is there a need to do so many copies? The lack of innovation and R&D capability. The US are huge in defence spending and industrial capability and still there are smaller countries like Israel, Sweden or Germany that show similar or even more innovations with far less spending. So being able to produce something similar, doesn't automatically mean you could have developed something similar on your own. Take J11 as an example, a good copy of the Su 27, but that doesn't gave China the capability to further develop it similar to Su34 or 35s did it? Having build J11 versions later and J10, didn't gave China the capability to develop own NG fighter designs either. The most innovative feature might be the SR missile bay, which clearly shows that they have developed it with certain aims behind it and not only copied from what they saw somewhere else. But exactly this kind of own innovation and R&D is still at low level compared to the defence spending at least, while the ammount of copies is very high.

The media claims a lot of things. I would suggest to evaluating more relevant defence journals and experts.

The future of the CX-1 would/could incorporate all of those things... upcoming days will tell with more info from Zhuhai.

To evaluate multiple frontiers at the same time. Again, you are going around like a roundabout.. There is something called a cost/benefit analysis. If you are able to procure that level of technology at less of a cost with the knowhow without having to go through developmental pains and extra cost.. any smart business will do exactly that. To negate your idea that the Chinese cannot do more.. please have a look at the Zhuhai Airshow thread for the various developments that show you exactly how beneficial this copy/modify/innovate doctrine can be.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom