The Chinese Bayraktar

[Oublious]

Ignorant Fool, Turkey's Bayraktar drone technology source, is from China's technology transfer, Turkey bought drones and rockets from China, and received technology transfer, turkey has domesticated China's WS2 rocket and Rainbow 3 drone. It was renamed and exported as a domestic product of Turkey

troll ahahah...

 

[jhungary]

Why don't they land on the moon once again to prove us that the previous moon landing wasn't a bullshit story?

Btw, Chinese companies do this for marketting purposes. A whole nationa cannot be held responsible for actions of an opportunist company and after all, China is a leading country in the field of drone technology.

Dude, we have like 7 Moon mission, and 500+ space mission afterward, they can't all be fake. And then all the moon rock we bring back with the hydrogen level so high it could not be come from earth, that already proof we have already landed on moon.

I mean, NASA do thing to progress their scientific purpose, not to be a showoff, they don't waste money as much as congress see space station being a heaps of money trap just to proof that we did went to the moon and back.

As for Chinese Bayraktar, if they want to ride the high on the Turkish drone, that's up to them, I have no qualm about whether or not they are copying the drone or copying the idea or whatever from another country and another company, but just so you know, doing this is exactly why a country cannot get ahead, because if you call J-20 the Chinese F-22 or Chinese HIMARS or whatever, you aren't getting ahead of the game because you name/call your product on an already existing thing.

 

[Beny Karachun]

Beny m'man,tell me...does that thing look like a TB2 or not? Because these wankers accuse me of being "anti-China". What do you see,man?

Definitely looks exactly like it

 

[etylo]

Are you so ignorant that you are unaware that China is actually at the very forefront of drone technology and the source of most drone tech and supply chains? I mean, coming from your tiny little irrelevant country, you are probably so disconnected with the economic center of gravity that you aren't aware of these simple facts.

He is just a China hater that like to discredit any thing Chinese does, thats all.

 

[dbc]

it's an export model for customers who demand a "Bayraktar" equivalent even if it means in looks.

Not quite, you can't export a copied design not without paying the necessary royalties to the firm that first designed the drone, Well you can but then you expose yourself to all kinds of legal issues. Copying the design saves thousands of hours of engineering effort and the added cost of wind tunnel tests. The Chinese are then able to sell a Bayraktar copy at a fraction of the cost of the original. So it's just unfair to the business that came up with the original design. If everyone followed this model it would very quickly kill innovation. The Chinese can easily come up an original design but they deliberately choose to take a short cut to make more profits.

 

[zhxy]

Not quite, you can't export a copied design not without paying the necessary royalties to the firm that first designed the drone,

I don't think companies and countries have the right to copyright aircraft geometry and aerodynamic laws.
If that's true, then Turkey should pay China because the appearance of the Kızılelma is very similar to the J-20

Copying the design saves thousands of hours of engineering effort and the added cost of wind tunnel tests. The Chinese are then able to sell a Bayraktar copy at a fraction of the cost of the original. So it's just unfair to the business that came up with the original design. If everyone followed this model it would very quickly kill innovation. The Chinese can easily come up an original design but they deliberately choose to take a short cut to make more profits.

This is weird, I feel like this logic only applies to china, if other countries do, that's a different case and you won't care.

 

[serenity]

Not quite, you can't export a copied design not without paying the necessary royalties to the firm that first designed the drone, Well you can but then you expose yourself to all kinds of legal issues. Copying the design saves thousands of hours of engineering effort and the added cost of wind tunnel tests. The Chinese are then able to sell a Bayraktar copy at a fraction of the cost of the original. So it's just unfair to the business that came up with the original design. If everyone followed this model it would very quickly kill innovation. The Chinese can easily come up an original design but they deliberately choose to take a short cut to make more profits.

But pundits choose to only focus on this one drone when there are hundreds of drones showed by China over the decade from flying thermos to loitering munitions to near space Mach 3+ reconnaissance and loyal wingmans or flying wing stealth attack drones. A great majority of those are totally novel designs no one else has used.

In terms of copying, everyone copies and uses a few common designs that are ubiquitous throughout the world. Quadcopter, Predator UAV, Global hawk UAV, helicopter style small drone. Turks, Brits, Chinese, Americans, French, Russians, Iranians all copy and use some common drone design.

Turks copied the J-20 design basically for MIUS then. Every flying wing UAV is a copy of the first flying wing UAV or even the Horton flying wing.

China has many more capable drones than Bayraktar that were in service years and years before Bayraktar.

One company is offering for export a Bayraktar aerodynamic copy. There are dozens of different aerodynamic designs in Chinese drone industry, a few that are totally novel. If Another country copies the aerodynamic layout and exports it, China can not stop that either.

It's just that in heavy weight and high technology drones, there are no countries in the league of USA and China. The next best one is basically Turkey with MIUS being developed (but China, USA, France, UK, and Russia all have high tech heavy weight strike drones or loyal wingman drones being developed or fielded too so Turkey is actually not leading in this area at all but showing the most of their program after Russia, the others are either slow in developing - UK France or secretive - USA China).

Who else makes HALE drones of extreme high altitude and endurance? Only China. Who else makes combined cycle and rocket propelled supersonic drones? Only China not even the US (at least in public knowledge). Turkey has made one high end MALE drone with Akinci and one low end MALE drone with Bayraktar. Due to war in Ukraine, Bayraktar name was propagandized and many stupid customers associate its design with success due to propaganda and the first time drones are used in this scale in actual war (Armenian and Azeri war doesn't compare to this). So some Chinese company of course will offer a design that looks similar to Bayraktar for the stupid customers who think there is some magic to this aerodynamic layout. And there is nothing magical about it other it would be used by USA, China, Russia, Iran, UK, France, North Korea, India, everyone who can make low end MALE drones would use this design.

They don't use this design because their higher end MALE drones are already better with longer endurance, more payload, and longer range. Those MALE drones have volume of space inside for much better electronic equipment for sensors and communication components. Bayraktar is made for low cost and ease of manufacturing. Good for some and good for some situations. Why not offer a commercial alternative. You can bet China's PLA will never buy this.

 

[Beast]

US also copy China moon landing. oops, China never has a moon landing.....

or how about US also copy Chinese probe to outside of our solar system, oops, China never has a probe reaching that far.

I can do the same with Space Telescope, Rover Landing, Sun Mission and basically picture of every planet in this world.

It's really stupid to compare Space Achievement between China and US. When you are talking about the only one thing the congress don't think it's worth funding Because US Space mission are usually long and frequent, they may as well do any scientific experiment during those mission instead of making a dedicated module solely because of that, hence congress sees it a waste of money.

Does that mean US don't have the capability to make such module?? I mean if you want to believe so, then please do go ahead.

Yes, China copy US 5G. Oops, US don't even have 5G?

How many people in China think this copying is embarrassing?

No Chinese feel embarrassed becos they is always a market for low end UCAV.

While PLAAF used high end UCAV which makes all Chinese proud.

Only stupid idiot like u think Chinese will lose sleep over the cheap TB2 copy produced for export.

The Norinco produced millions of cheap AR-15 rifle export to US and Canada and you think those copy is for Chinese domestic market to use? US and Canada has cheap customers who want a similar performance AR while without burning a pocket buying from armalite.

So who is the the getting embarrassed? The cheap american, Canadian customers or Norinco? Or you think Chinese feel embarass becos they themselves don't even use it.....

 

[serenity]

There is nothing about copying that stifles innovation.

Look at Soar Dragon, WZ-7, WZ-8, Divine Eagle range of dual fuselage (for electronics and side scanning radars) as a program and what the program produced, all the VTOL drones and the dozens of aerodynamic arrangements of those, Loitering types, transmedium drones that are designed to fly and also go underwater or on the surface of water and switch between.

There is innovation even if there is a side of applying established designs. China is not the only one that used the Global Hawk and Predator drone established designs, Israel also did, UK did, Russia did, India tries, Turkey did as well. It also applied flying wing design to drones. US and France were the first ones to begin experimenting with flying wing drones. But many others use it too. GJ-11 is in service flying wing attack drone. Russia's Hunter is flying wing loyal wingman. India is trying hard to make one as well but has not managed to make a true flying wing because their prototype still uses a vertical stabiliser even for a small RC model plane level demonstrator. Clearly execution and development if 99% of the job rather than saying okay we will copy that design.

A country can say we will copy the F-22 F-35 design but even Korea struggles with it for about a decade just to deliver a platform without even internal weapons bays. India is trying to copy it. Japan is trying to copy it. Turkey is trying to copy it.


Making it is much harder to waking up and deciding to copy the outward design. With drones, China has more innovative drone types than any other country except USA. And yet China also applies every established design type. This annoys China haters because they don't want China to use any established design types but everyone does it. They just can't stand that China also does it. Actually can make it all with great components they can supply. They also sell everywhere successfully. What's wrong with China applying established designs and copying like everyone else already does? China just does it at a scale the others cannot do it on. In the meantime China also developed and fielded drones that are innovative which others do not have. This proves that having a side that copies and applies established designs does not stifle innovation. It has nothing to do with innovation.

Offering an established design for export also does not have anything to do with innovation. It doesn't stop itself from also innovating (China clearly does otherwise it wouldn't have 3 to 5 drone types that no one else has and no one else has designed) and it also doesn't stop others from innovating. Why would it? If you are innovative and design a new type of aerodynamic arrangement, it must work well first before other want to buy it. Nothing stops others from buying yours if it works well and is innovative. So how are these things even related. Sounds like a massive cope.

 

[K_Bin_W]

China also copies US space station, oops, US never has a space station..

And what about 5G? China also stole 5G from US in 2030.

 

[dbc]

I don't think companies and countries have the right to copyright aircraft geometry and aerodynamic laws.
If that's true, then Turkey should pay China because the appearance of the Kızılelma is very similar to the J-20



This is weird, I feel like this logic only applies to china, if other countries do, that's a different case and you won't care.

to the lay person the Shinshin may appear to be a copy of the F-22 but it's not, the nose, air intake, wing and stabilizer is all different. Also no nation with any war fighting experience will ever copy the J-20.

 

[serenity]

US doesn't even bother making TB-2 level low end MALE drones. It is not in its usefulness doctrine. China doesn't field TB-2 level low end MALE drones for service either as a strike platform. It has CH-4, WL-2, WL-3, GJ series based on CH and WL series and GJ-11. These platforms are much larger than TB-2.

TB-2 can hold no sophisticated electronics. Just commercial grade basic stuff. In war against US or any enemy that's not low tier, TB-2 would get annihilated just using electronic war. Even Russia manages to destroy most TB-2 which Ukraine admits to. Russia uses expensive SAMs to do this but honestly you do expect TB-2 to do some damage to Russia and every single instance it manages to do anything, it is propagandized to nth degree. Any other more capable MALE drone would have done far more damage against Russia performing in the way it does - convoys sitting still for days with bare air defence.

 

[Beast]

US doesn't even bother making TB-2 level low end MALE drones. It is not in its usefulness doctrine. China doesn't field TB-2 level low end MALE drones for service either as a strike platform. It has CH-4, WL-2, WL-3, GJ series based on CH and WL series and GJ-11. These platforms are much larger than TB-2.

TB-2 can hold no sophisticated electronics. Just commercial grade basic stuff. In war against US or any enemy that's not low tier, TB-2 would get annihilated just using electronic war. Even Russia manages to destroy most TB-2 which Ukraine admits to. Russia uses expensive SAMs to do this but honestly you do expect TB-2 to do some damage to Russia and every single instance it manages to do anything, it is propagandized to nth degree. Any other more capable MALE drone would have done far more damage against Russia performing in the way it does - convoys sitting still for days with bare air defence.

They are many times , it the western countries who wanted cheap imitation and China factories simply just produced according to demand of western customers.

China factories are very practical. We produced items needed by export customers. No factories will produce item deem too expensive which nobody wants and loses money.

 

[serenity]

to the lay person the Shinshin may appear to be a copy of the F-22 but it's not, the nose, air intake, wing and stabilizer is all different. Also no nation with any war fighting experience will ever copy the J-20.

So basically when China uses established designs it can only copy but when it doesn't use established designs, it is a terrible design (according to you and people like you).

Basically you have set the discussion up in a way that your version and interpretation of things is irrefutable by how you established the axioms.

Axiom 1. China only copies. Ignore the fact that everyone not at absolute leading edge also only copies.

Axiom 2. For some reasons when China seemingly is not copying an established design. It is not because it's doing its own thing that suits it best and not because it is capable of not copying but it's because it is using a design that is bad. Any different approach used by China must be called bad.

Very productive sorts of conversations to be had with this approach. China bad, always.

 

[dbc]

And what about 5G? China also stole 5G from US in 2030.

sort of, Huwaei acquired the core IP of 5G technology from a Turk named Erdal Arıkan a former researcher at the University of illinois without Polar coding developed by Prof Ankan Chinese 5G wouldn't exist.