Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    China's copy of Russian military equipment

    RTN
    RTN

    Posts : 208
    Points : 187
    Join date : 2014-03-24
    Location : Fairfield, CT

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  RTN on Sat Apr 12, 2014 11:03 am

    Why is a thread devoted to the S 400 / S 500 being hijacked by individuals to discuss China & India ?
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 5154
    Points : 5307
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sat Apr 12, 2014 9:35 pm

    Sujoy wrote:

    First , I never said that China sold J 15 or J 11 in the international market . I said China copied Russian designs without taking prior permission .

    http://en.ria.ru/analysis/20080425/105928822.html

    Lets look at what you said then. Here's your quote:

    Sujoy wrote:Fact remains that China purchases weapons from Russia , then remakes them and sells them in the international market .

    So Su 33 becomes J 15 , Su-27SK becomes J 11 and S 300V becomes HQ 9 .

    It's pretty cut-and-dry that you asserted that China was going to sell reverse engineered Russian tech, and it was obvious that you weren't aware that Russia and China had signed an intellectual property rights agreement over defense technology.

    Second , China has already offered the J 11 to Pakistan .


    If Pakistan was offered J-11's as you claim, then please be so kind to point out how many J-11's are in service in the Pakistani air-force would you? otherwise then that claim was most likely an unsubstantiated rumor. Pakistan "inspected" J-11B's in March 2011 in a joint Sino-Pakistani exercise, called Shaheen 1, which is in stark contrast to actually being in discussion with China to order J-11's which is erroneous. BTW the ria novosti article was an opinion piece all the way back from 2008, Russian and Chinese relations have progressed since then.


    It wasn't . It has component's from the S 300P and is just an imitation of the S 300 PMU .  If China indeed can produce effective SAM in house why does it need to purchase SAM systems from Russia at regular intervals ? And why does a Chinese clone appear only after a purchase has been made from Russia ?

    http://books.google.co.in/books?id=krLeSI6vayoC&pg=PA142&lpg=PA142&dq=hq+9+missile+copied+from+S+300&source=bl&ots=urbWrfwHiH&sig=r42r7uJz0sQRrbDbf-sXbmWY3Io&hl=en&sa=X&ei=fqFHU8asGYL38QWkrYLwBw&ved=0CHMQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=hq%209%20missile%20copied%20from%20S%20300&f=false


    The Chinese are using HQ-9 missiles with the S-300 command posts and radars, which reduces the need to buy the Russian SAM systems .


    There is some contradictions I must point out via the "reductio ad absurdum" method. Lets address for one if the HQ-9 is simply copied tech with no legal assistance from the Russian side, than how is that the Russian's didn't make even so much as a peep about pirated intellectual property in the Turkish air-defense tender? Russia and China just only recently signed a intellectual property rights agreement, but the HQ-9 has been in service since 1997, it would of been well within Russia's right to complain but they didn't why is that? As you said Russia was "threatening to sue China" if they didn't respect IP rights, if they didn't complain than it suggests that the HQ-9 wasn't violating Russia's IP despite sharing technology, suggesting the Russian's helped design it and stands to profit off sales of the HQ-9.

    Advanced SAM technology is some of the hardest defense tech to reverse engineer (while assault rifles are the exact opposite), and look at the HQ-9 and the Patriot PAC-3 which were offered in in the Turkish tender. The developers of both systems both had extensive looks at S-300 technology (Raytheon took a deep hard look at Slovakian S-300's), both had legal technology transfers of S-300 tech to improve domestic SAMs (China was given license production as well as a tech transfer, S-300 tech was sold voluntarily to Raytheon to improve the Patriot SAM) but if advanced SAM tech is as easy to reverse engineer as you make it out to be than why is that neither system is superior to the most modern S-300? More importantly why is that the HQ-9 has superior capabilities over the PAC-3, despite the fact that the Chinese arms industry is less matured and less experienced that the totality of NATO arms industry (which the PAC-3 is the standard)? For China to leapfrog NATO in SAM technology suggests Russia played a role in designing the HQ-9, combined with fact that there was very much a lack of "legal action" taken. Please address why the Russians didn't take any legal action there.

    You need to get your facts right . The S 400 was never offered to Turkey . Rosoboronexport had offered the export version  of S 300 to Turkey .

    http://thediplomat.com/2013/09/why-turkeys-buying-chinese-missile-systems/

    Actually Russia offered both, except the problem was that Russia was not ready to sell the S-400 just yet and said if they were patient than they would eventually get the S-400 when they were ready, but the S-300 was offered initially as a stop-gap until then obviously with the advantage of being able to share parts and spares between each other to lessen the logistics tail. Saying the S-400 wasn't offered to Turkey is like saying the Mig-35 wasn't offered to India, they would get their orders but they would have to be patient and wait some time.

    A side note might be a good idea that people should not post links to articles from the yellow journalist Zachary Keck as his credibility is questionable, just look at all the factual errors, erroneous claims and omitted facts in this embarrassingly laughable Russophobic article lol:

    http://thediplomat.com/2014/04/undermine-russia-from-within/

    Only after Russia had threatened legal action against China

    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/europe/Sukhoi-piracy-Russia-threatens-to-sue-China/articleshow/2973405.cms

    The problem with the source you posted is that they quoted one source which was none other than the sensationalist Nezavisimaya Gazeta, owned by the Berezovsky media group, the infamous Berezovsky who looted the Soviet economy, who refused to pay his taxes, ran to England and falsely claimed to be an anti-corruption advocate, and a freedom fighter. One Nezavisimaya Gazeta editor was on Al Jazeera debating the purpose of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and was quoted as saying "It will help with containment (of China)", so they're slant is to be negative and pessimistic of anything concerning Russia, due to the fact that they're disgruntled and have an ax to grind with the Russian govt. for forcing Berezovsky to pay his taxes on assets and wealth he stole from Russia.

    In reality their were no plans to sue China, more like just to refuse to sell to China if they didn't sign an intellectual property rights agreement (which they signed).
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21733
    Points : 22279
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  GarryB on Sun Apr 13, 2014 11:41 am

    Why is a thread devoted to the S 400 / S 500 being hijacked by individuals to discuss China & India ?

    Very good point RTN.

    Please keep as on topic as possible people.

    The discussion around why India and China are not friends and the role Russia and her sales relates to this is off topic and should be avoided please.

    Potential sales of S-400 to India or China are relevant.

    With a US based ABM shield going up in Europe and perhaps Asia (ie South Korea/Japan/US) I personally think a sale of S-500 to China might be a real possibility too, with the INF treaty in tatters perhaps sales of IRBMs around the place might occur too.
    nemrod
    nemrod

    Posts : 828
    Points : 1326
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty CX-1 ASCM Missile Systems

    Post  nemrod on Thu Apr 30, 2015 8:43 pm


    CX-1 cruise missile better than BrahMos ?

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Dfbb5c406868129

    A copy or not ? Seeing the similiraties with the SSN-X-26 -Brahmos-,  and the chinese tradition to copy russian/soviet hardwares, I have no doubt. This is my P.O.V.. If you have any other clues to prove me the contrary, please do not hesitate, but I doubt you could provide me enough fair proofs. Nevertheless, with this new hardware, the US Navy's position will be more and more perillous. They maybe could  -could, does not necessary mean they will-intercep any subsonic cruise missiles, -with for example Phalanx, or other aam 120 c sidewinder-but a supersonic missile it is near impossible. The Brahmos is nowadays, the best cruise missile in the world. As the Chaoxun-1 is clearly intented to be exported to the world wide, with the  proliferation of such powerfull missiles,  it is not good news for America as  US  Navy's future is clearly jeopartized.
    It is noteworthy to add that the successor of the Brahmos, the Brahmos II, with speed reaching Mach 7, it will be the definitive end to US Navy.



    http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=20141120000089&cid=1101

    CX-1 cruise missile better than BrahMos, not a copy: report

    After China's CX-1 supersonic cruise missile, displayed at the recent Zhuhai Airshow, was noted to resemble India's BrahMos missile, the Beijing-based Sina Military Network undertook a comparison between the Chinese and Indian missiles on Nov. 18.

    The Chaoxun-1 missile designed by China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation has earned the nickname Cahoxi 1 ("Copy 1" in English) because of its uncanny similarity to the BrahMos missile jointly developed by Russia and India. However, Wang Hongpo, the chief designer of the missile, said the CX-1 is a completely new design. Wang said it has different wings, aerodynamic guidance and jet vane.

    Under the restrictions of the Missile Technology Control Regime, the attacking range of cruise missiles like the CX-1 and BrahMos can not exceed 300 kilometers. Wang said this is the main reason the CX-1 shares many similar characteristics with the BrahMos. Sina Military Network noted that the CX-1 flies faster than the Indian missile. It is capable of reaching a speed of Mach 3 at 17,000 meters, whereas the BrahMos can only reach Mach 2.6 at an altitude of 14,000 meters.

    Launched against targets in low altitude, the speed of the CX-1 is Mach 2.3., while the Russian-built P-800 Oniks on which the BrahMos is designed can only reach Mach 2. Sina Military Network said the CX-1's ramjet engine may be better than the solid rocket motor of the P-800. However, it pointed out that the attack range of CX-1 can be reduced to 40 kilometers at low trajectories while the Russian missile can travel 120 kilometers.

    Since the BrahMos is designed to conduct attacks below an altitude of 500 meters, the Sina Military Network said the Indian missile is unsuitable for actual combat situations. Though India plans to produce 2,000 BrahMos, only 200 of them have been produced, the report said, adding that the proof of the CX-1's superiority will rest in how many nations wish to purchase it.
    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  max steel on Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:27 pm

    Take Want China Times with grain of salt . Cool
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 21733
    Points : 22279
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  GarryB on Sat May 02, 2015 9:57 am

    The Chinese have Yakhont, so I suspect this is their version.

    Talk of range restrictions of the Missile Technology Control Regime proves it is an export missile... a domestic Chinese missile would not be restricted by the MTCR.

    Launched against targets in low altitude, the speed of the CX-1 is Mach 2.3., while the Russian-built P-800 Oniks on which the BrahMos is designed can only reach Mach 2. Sina Military Network said the CX-1's ramjet engine may be better than the solid rocket motor of the P-800. However, it pointed out that the attack range of CX-1 can be reduced to 40 kilometers at low trajectories while the Russian missile can travel 120 kilometers.

    120km range is the range for Moskit... SS-N-22, which has a maximum flight altitude of about 300m and a normal flight altitude of less than 5 metres. Upgraded Moskits manage 250km ranges easily.

    Onyx is reported to have a range of 500km... Brahmos is based on the MTCR restricted Yakhont, not the Onyx which have no range or warhead restrictions.

    Since the BrahMos is designed to conduct attacks below an altitude of 500 meters, the Sina Military Network said the Indian missile is unsuitable for actual combat situations.


    High altitude missiles can be detected and engaged at high altitudes... being able to fly at low altitudes is an advantage... not a weakness.

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Alfa10

    the main difference is the nose... and the article mentions the Chinese missile is superior as it uses a ramjet instead of the rocket motor the Russian missile uses... except under the nose fairing for carrying the missile on an aircraft is the same nose mounted MiG-21 like intake for a ramjet motor...

    Both missiles likely use the same rocket ramjet propulsion because they are the same missile.
    avatar
    type055

    Posts : 101
    Points : 106
    Join date : 2014-09-03

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  type055 on Mon May 11, 2015 11:48 am

    as I konw, China never get Yakhont,

    there was competition of antiship missile. the winner is YJ-18,loser is this one CX-1, CX-1 is just for export (follwed the MTCR)

    CX-1 is easy to detected , It fly very high with big infrared signal ,making itself a big target , the ship has modern air-defense missile can easily defend it.

    CX-1 also has shorter range than YJ-18

    CX-1 is useful to attack ship with no Aegis system.



    Vladimir79
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2914
    Points : 3790
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  Vladimir79 on Mon May 11, 2015 11:51 am

    If it was better, they would be exporting it.
    nemrod
    nemrod

    Posts : 828
    Points : 1326
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  nemrod on Sat Jun 13, 2015 12:00 am

    Vladimir79 wrote:If it was better, they would be exporting it.
    The purpose of this missile is the export, and Iran, North Korea would be its destination

    type055 wrote:as I konw, China never get Yakhont,
    China was provided by Yakhont when USSR collapsed, the origin must be Ukraine.

    type055 wrote:
    CX-1 is useful to attack  ship with no Aegis system.

    I've never seen an US system really miraculous, if theyr are just only with their hype. If a think is sure, with or without AEGIS the CX-01 can sink every ship.
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7095
    Points : 7363
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  sepheronx on Thu Nov 19, 2015 7:02 am

    As I posted in the export thread:
    http://sputniknews.com/military/20151119/1030368307/russia-sells-china-billions-dollar-su35.html


    Seems it is claimed that China purchased 24 Su-35's for $2B.
    max steel
    max steel

    Posts : 2939
    Points : 2964
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  max steel on Sun Nov 22, 2015 1:05 pm

    China will get 24 Su-35s.


    Those 24 Su 35s acquisition is more likely to churn out better Jxx clones.

    What will 24 Su35s achieve in an area dominated by 100+ flankers and USN CVBGs ?
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  Guest on Sun Nov 22, 2015 1:18 pm

    max steel wrote:China will get 24 Su-35s.


    Those 24 Su 35s acquisition is more likely to churn out better Jxx clones.

    What will 24 Su35s achieve in an area dominated by 100+ flankers and USN CVBGs ?

    Well 24 fighters are more than whole airforces of some countries have, its not that minor asset as one might think, also its outperforming Jxx SU27 derivates which makes it nice force multiplier basically. And this will make them capable of even faster replacement of old J7s and that seems as their main goal atm.

    Russians are aware of that fact, that China is after engine technology however Russians said almost 2 years ago, that in case it comes to sale of SU35 to China contract will be written that way it makes unable for Chinese to reverse engineer its enginies and technology in general without having to pay immense amounts in return. But even if they reverse engineer it, what, Russia is anways going for Izd 30 in future.
    medo
    medo

    Posts : 3583
    Points : 3667
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  medo on Sun Nov 22, 2015 2:08 pm

    There is also a good question of differences between domestic and export Su-35. There is a good chance to place 2D TVC with lower angle of moving like in Su-30MKI instead of 3D TVC. They could be without L-band AESA complex in the wings and without RVV-BD missiles also they could reduce Irbis radar capabilities by placing with only 1 transmitter instead of 2 and lower the peak power from 20 kW to 10 kW and taking out some delicate modes, changes could be as well in data link capabilities, etc.
    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 4913
    Points : 4943
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 77
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sun Nov 22, 2015 3:43 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    max steel wrote:China will get 24 Su-35s.


    Those 24 Su 35s acquisition is more likely to churn out better Jxx clones.

    What will 24 Su35s achieve in an area dominated by 100+ flankers and USN CVBGs ?

    Well 24 fighters are more than whole airforces of some countries have, its not that minor asset as one might think, also its outperforming Jxx SU27 derivates which makes it nice force multiplier basically. And this will make them capable of even faster replacement of old J7s and that seems as their main goal atm.

    Russians are aware of that fact, that China is after engine technology however Russians said almost 2 years ago, that in case it comes to sale of SU35 to China contract will be written that way it makes unable for Chinese to reverse engineer its enginies and technology in general without having to pay immense amounts in return. But even if they reverse engineer it, what, Russia is anways going for Izd 30 in future.

    I am quite sure Russian authorities considered all pro and cons. IMHO current state of Sino-Russian relations unlikely such copy - due to political factors. In every case there is a common enemy making all efforts to start 3 World War before western economy collapses. Su-35 based is nice asset rotecting Spratly Islands for 3 example.
    Giulio
    Giulio

    Posts : 170
    Points : 193
    Join date : 2013-10-29
    Location : Italy

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  Giulio on Fri Nov 27, 2015 7:34 am

    No matter if the Chinese will copy the technology of the Su-35?
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  Guest on Fri Nov 27, 2015 10:25 pm

    Giulio wrote:No matter if the Chinese will copy the technology of the Su-35?
    Doesn't matter, this will become China's most advanced air wing for the next several years and it will be completely dependent on Russia. Besides, you can only reverse engineer it to some extent. It is near impossible to make an exact 1:1 copy of the Su-35. China won't be able to make an aircraft that can match the Su-35 any time soon. Their most advanced J-11s are only said to match the now decades old original Su-35 (Su-27M) in their capabilities. So in approximately 17 years, the Chinese were finally able to achieve what Russia had gotten to in 1988.
    Kimppis
    Kimppis

    Posts : 603
    Points : 603
    Join date : 2014-12-23

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  Kimppis on Sat Nov 28, 2015 10:08 pm

    Keep underestimating China. Chinese electronics, avionics, etc. are superior to current Russian ones and they have AESA radars in active service, but suuureee... they are only comparable to Soviet aircraft from 1988.

    Although I do agree that it's probably somewhat more advanced than the Chinese Flankers currently in service. That said, J-11D (and J-16?) should be comparable and it will probably be finished in a few years. Not to mention that J-20 is going to enter service quite soon too.

    But the main thing is that they can replace additional 24 J-7s with modern fighters, a little sooner. And Su-35 is going to be superior to all the other 4th gens in the region.


    Last edited by Kimppis on Sat Nov 28, 2015 10:17 pm; edited 1 time in total
    sepheronx
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7095
    Points : 7363
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 30
    Location : Canada

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  sepheronx on Sat Nov 28, 2015 10:33 pm

    Kimppis wrote:Keep underestimating China. Chinese electronics, avionics, etc. are superior to current Russian ones and they have AESA radars in active service, but suuureee... they are only comparable to Soviet aircraft from 1988.

    Although I do agree that it's probably somewhat more advanced than the Chinese Flankers currently in service. That said, J-11D (and J-16?) should be comparable and it will probably be finished in a few years. Not to mention that J-20 is going to enter service quite soon too.

    But the main thing is that they can replace additional 24 J-7s with modern fighters, a little sooner. And Su-35 is going to be superior to all the other 4th gens in the region.

    ?

    You must be slow.  But can you point out the Radar that China uses that is actually AESA?  What is its performance?  Do you know the difference between AESA and PESA? Benefits and such?  Did you know that Russia has been producing GaAS T/R modules and AESA also for years?  Did you know that China is interested in the Su-35 simply because of its prowess?  Now Russia is working on GaN modules as well.

    And you point out exactly where China's avionics is better than Russian? Cause I can tell you, you are full of shit.  Which doesn't come as a surprise since you did not provide 1 form of proof, or even really contribute to this forums besides being useless with your posts.

    Did you know that the Irbis-E performance is pretty much on part to the APG-79 used on F-22 simply because of its raw output in KW? This is the key here for you to understand - power applied to the radar systems. AESA isn't some magic system, it is another form of radar technology alternative to PESA. AESA has problems due to T/R module consistency and reliability. There is roughly a 10% failure rate in T/R Modules found in all types of AESA radar, and that 10% failure rate is significant. Add to that, you need to look at how many Watts those T/R modules are operating at? Russia's T/R modules from Istok is roughly 10w each while ones used for N036 for PAK FA testing are 15W each and right now working on developing another method of making them cheap and smaller to fit even more on a radar. As well as GaN. This has been discussed in the PAK FA thread.


    Last edited by sepheronx on Sat Nov 28, 2015 10:39 pm; edited 1 time in total
    KoTeMoRe
    KoTeMoRe

    Posts : 3981
    Points : 3998
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Sat Nov 28, 2015 10:37 pm

    Kimppis wrote:Keep underestimating China. Chinese electronics, avionics, etc. are superior to current Russian ones and they have AESA radars in active service, but suuureee... they are only comparable to Soviet aircraft from 1988.

    Although I do agree that it's probably somewhat more advanced than the Chinese Flankers currently in service. That said, J-11D (and J-16?) should be comparable and it will probably be finished in a few years. Not to mention that J-20 is going to enter service quite soon too.

    But the main thing is that they can replace additional 24 J-7s with modern fighters, a little sooner. And Su-35 is going to be superior to all the other 4th gens in the region.

    With which engines is the J-20 going to fly? Chinese electronics aren't more advanced than Russian current, but in a sense they don't need to be, quantity is a quality on its own. The fact that the chinese want to contract for more Sukhois in order to sample them, is telling.

    For the rest I agree, these planes need to keep coming.
    Zivo
    Zivo

    Posts : 1488
    Points : 1514
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  Zivo on Sat Nov 28, 2015 11:00 pm

    The thing about the Su-35 and the J-20 is that they don't need to be the best, they just need to be better than 90% of the aircraft out there.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  Guest on Sat Nov 28, 2015 11:17 pm

    Kimppis wrote:Keep underestimating China. Chinese electronics, avionics, etc. are superior to current Russian ones and they have AESA radars in active service, but suuureee... they are only comparable to Soviet aircraft from 1988.

    Although I do agree that it's probably somewhat more advanced than the Chinese Flankers currently in service. That said, J-11D (and J-16?) should be comparable and it will probably be finished in a few years. Not to mention that J-20 is going to enter service quite soon too.

    But the main thing is that they can replace additional 24 J-7s with modern fighters, a little sooner. And Su-35 is going to be superior to all the other 4th gens in the region.
    Not an underestimation by any means. If the J-11D was even comparable to the Su-35, they wouldn't need to buy the Su-35. It doesn't make sense to buy an aircraft that supposedly only has better engines. Even more so, the Su-35 can't use Chinese weapons nor can it interface with Chinese AWACS or other radars. Either the Chinese Military Command isn't very competent with how they are spending their money or they have serious doubts about the J-11D's abilities when they still go ahead and procure approximately 2 squadrons of Su-35s. And before the "China needs engines" excuse is pulled to justify the purchase of the Su-35, the 117S is export approved and I doubt Russia would object if China just ordered a large batch of 117S engines instead of the Su-35.

    As for the J-20. It is pretty cool seeing how a fully matured MiG 1.44 may have looked like along with other stolen technology from the US. Like the F-35's EOTS. I am starting to doubt that I will ever see the day when the Chinese produce a fighter without "referencing" someone else's design.
    Kimppis
    Kimppis

    Posts : 603
    Points : 603
    Join date : 2014-12-23

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  Kimppis on Sat Nov 28, 2015 11:32 pm

    And here we go again...

    Yes, I've read that Su-35s radar is not necessarily worse even though it's not AESA and that its detection range is excellent. Fair enough.

    But the issue is that a lot of people keep underestimating Chinese tech (and Russian tech too) and it feels like it's still 2001 (or heck, even 2010), even though their advancements have been huuuuge. Read Sinodefence forums, people.

    So overall, maybe I went too far when I said that their electrionics and avionics are simply better than the Russian ones. But they are not much worse, and certainly not in around 2020. That's common sense when you look at the size of the economy, R&D spending, military budget, 052D, 055, J-20, J-31, J-10B/C, J-11D, J-16, improving tech in general...

    Regarding J-20s engines... Well it seems that it's going to enter service with interim engines (WS-10 or AL-31) and then they'll move on to WS-15 once that is ready (maybe around 2020?). So yeah, engines are probably China's biggest weakness, but it seems they are making great strides and in any case, underpowered 5th gen is better than no 5th gen at all.

    China is going to have atleast around 1000 4th (and 5th) gen fighters in 2020. So yes, that is going to keep the US "busy". I'm sure Russia is happy about that.

    And thanks for your kind words Sepheronx. Atleast I don't talk about things that I know nothing about (I have no really detailed knowledge about military equipment or tactics, for example), so it should be fine. But I think I have a pretty good overall picture of different militaries and their strength, geopolitics, economies and military history. The big picture.

    This forum is full of BS too, even without me. Smile There are quite a few conspiracy theorists, "the west is going to collapse tomorrow, it's all fake", anti-semitism, racism, absolutely blatant Russia fanboyism... MP.net was really pro-US and pro-west, but this place isn't much more objective. And to me that is usually OK (I guess)... just saying.
    Kimppis
    Kimppis

    Posts : 603
    Points : 603
    Join date : 2014-12-23

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  Kimppis on Sat Nov 28, 2015 11:52 pm

    Ivan the Colorado wrote:
    Kimppis wrote:Keep underestimating China. Chinese electronics, avionics, etc. are superior to current Russian ones and they have AESA radars in active service, but suuureee... they are only comparable to Soviet aircraft from 1988.

    Although I do agree that it's probably somewhat more advanced than the Chinese Flankers currently in service. That said, J-11D (and J-16?) should be comparable and it will probably be finished in a few years. Not to mention that J-20 is going to enter service quite soon too.

    But the main thing is that they can replace additional 24 J-7s with modern fighters, a little sooner. And Su-35 is going to be superior to all the other 4th gens in the region.
    Not an underestimation by any means. If the J-11D was even comparable to the Su-35, they wouldn't need to buy the Su-35. It doesn't make sense to buy an aircraft that supposedly only has better engines. Even more so, the Su-35 can't use Chinese weapons nor can it interface with Chinese AWACS or other radars. Either the Chinese Military Command isn't very competent with how they are spending their money or they have serious doubts about the J-11D's abilities when they still go ahead and procure approximately 2 squadrons of Su-35s. And before the "China needs engines" excuse is pulled to justify the purchase of the Su-35, the 117S is export approved and I doubt Russia would object if China just ordered a large batch of 117S engines instead of the Su-35.

    As for the J-20. It is pretty cool seeing how a fully matured MiG 1.44 may have looked like along with other stolen technology from the US. Like the F-35's EOTS. I am starting to doubt that I will ever see the day when the Chinese produce a fighter without "referencing" someone else's design.

    Honestly, it's probably mostly about the engines. If Chinese tech is so inferior why are they only buying 24 of them? And I've read that Su-35 must be able to interface with Chinese AWACS and radars. Otherwise it would make absolutely no sense to buy them. All in all, it seems to me that the importance of this deal should not be exaggerated to one way or another.

    J-20 is not a copy of MiG 1.44, WTF! And yes, J-20 has an EOTS too, so it must be a copy! It's these fucking "double standards" that piss me off... When Chinese weapon systems have some similar characteristics as some of their foreign counterparts, they must automatically be copies! You know... competing systems often tend to look quite similar throughout the history... OMG! How can that be! Chinese designers have to follow the same laws of aerodynamics (and physics) as everyone else... How dare they! And there's absolutely no fucking proof about copying in most cases. It's all media speculation and anti-Chinese propaganda. Of course the Chinese Flankers (or rather, their airframe) were originally copied from Su-27, that is blatantly clear. But J-20? Or even J-31? Total BS. It's so funny... Mitsubishi ATD-X, the Korean KF-X and Saab 2020 are not copies of F-35, but J-31 is? Logic!

    These Chinese advancements are totally logical and expected when you look at the overall strength of the country, the size of its economy, R&D and military budget. It should not come as a surprise to anyone, FFS.
    KoTeMoRe
    KoTeMoRe

    Posts : 3981
    Points : 3998
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Sun Nov 29, 2015 12:05 am

    Kimppis wrote:
    Ivan the Colorado wrote:
    Kimppis wrote:Keep underestimating China. Chinese electronics, avionics, etc. are superior to current Russian ones and they have AESA radars in active service, but suuureee... they are only comparable to Soviet aircraft from 1988.

    Although I do agree that it's probably somewhat more advanced than the Chinese Flankers currently in service. That said, J-11D (and J-16?) should be comparable and it will probably be finished in a few years. Not to mention that J-20 is going to enter service quite soon too.

    But the main thing is that they can replace additional 24 J-7s with modern fighters, a little sooner. And Su-35 is going to be superior to all the other 4th gens in the region.
    Not an underestimation by any means. If the J-11D was even comparable to the Su-35, they wouldn't need to buy the Su-35. It doesn't make sense to buy an aircraft that supposedly only has better engines. Even more so, the Su-35 can't use Chinese weapons nor can it interface with Chinese AWACS or other radars. Either the Chinese Military Command isn't very competent with how they are spending their money or they have serious doubts about the J-11D's abilities when they still go ahead and procure approximately 2 squadrons of Su-35s. And before the "China needs engines" excuse is pulled to justify the purchase of the Su-35, the 117S is export approved and I doubt Russia would object if China just ordered a large batch of 117S engines instead of the Su-35.

    As for the J-20. It is pretty cool seeing how a fully matured MiG 1.44 may have looked like along with other stolen technology from the US. Like the F-35's EOTS. I am starting to doubt that I will ever see the day when the Chinese produce a fighter without "referencing" someone else's design.

    Honestly, it's probably mostly about the engines. If Chinese tech is so inferior why are they only buying 24 of them? And I've read that Su-35 must be able to interface with Chinese AWACS and radars. Otherwise it would make absolutely no sense to buy them. All in all, it seems to me that the importance of this deal should not be exaggerated to one way or another.

    J-20 is not a copy of MiG 1.44, WTF! And yes, J-20 has an EOTS too, so it must be a copy! It's these fucking "double standards" that piss me off... When Chinese weapon systems have some similar characteristics to some of their foreign counterparts, they must automaticallybe copies! You know... competing systems often tend to look quite similar throughout the history... OMG! How can that be! Chinese designers have to follow the same laws of aerodynamics (and physics) as everyone else... How dare they! And there's absolutely no fucking proof about copying in most cases. It's all media speculation and anti-Chinese propaganda. Of course the Chinese Flankers (or rather, their airframe) were originally copied from Su-27, that is blatantly clear. But J-20? Or even J-31? Total BS. It's so funny... Mitsubishi ATD-X, the Korean KF-X and Saab 2020 are not copies of F-35, but J-31 is? Logic!

    These Chinese advancements are totally logical and expected when you look at the overall strength of the country, the size of its economy, R&D and military budget. It should not come as a surprise to anyone, FFS.    

    It will will be always about the engines and the armament. Basically the computing power and radar can be dealt with, like the Koreans with their own auto engines. They were poor and classic but with a little beefing up, you wouldn't make a difference between them and german cars.

    So baasically, they need the sampling, it will be always about the sampling. Now the J-20 has a lot of things going through the 1.44 lineage. Off course that doesn't mean much. But the fact is though that the J20 has possibly worse engines than the 1.44. There's also the fun part about chinese weapons, so far, the Chinese armament has been conservative, taking from foreign systems what it needed. The best example is the HJ-12 (Javelin Tse Toung). Which doesn't mean it is a bad thing, just showing that on many aspects the Chinese will be conservative and will wait for someone else to break through. They weren't copied, they were reverse engineered for the most part on the J11's from C on. And they didn't need to copy, they just exceeded the licence they had. So yeah, the Chinese play dirty sometimes, and I understand that they need to, because of their relative need to catch up.

    Well as for the rest, the size of the economy doesn't explain much there. There are vast domains in which the Chinese with all those trillions roll in 1980 level tin boxes or have the equivalent of Desert Storm era radios. Now let's not get ahead of our times here. China is catching, granted, but they have a huge amount of consolidation to do.

    For instance they have to make up their mind about their infantry rifles, infantry doctrine and overall have some fighting experience.

    Kimppis
    Kimppis

    Posts : 603
    Points : 603
    Join date : 2014-12-23

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  Kimppis on Sun Nov 29, 2015 12:24 am

    KoTeMoRe wrote:
    Kimppis wrote:
    Ivan the Colorado wrote:
    Kimppis wrote:Keep underestimating China. Chinese electronics, avionics, etc. are superior to current Russian ones and they have AESA radars in active service, but suuureee... they are only comparable to Soviet aircraft from 1988.

    Although I do agree that it's probably somewhat more advanced than the Chinese Flankers currently in service. That said, J-11D (and J-16?) should be comparable and it will probably be finished in a few years. Not to mention that J-20 is going to enter service quite soon too.

    But the main thing is that they can replace additional 24 J-7s with modern fighters, a little sooner. And Su-35 is going to be superior to all the other 4th gens in the region.
    Not an underestimation by any means. If the J-11D was even comparable to the Su-35, they wouldn't need to buy the Su-35. It doesn't make sense to buy an aircraft that supposedly only has better engines. Even more so, the Su-35 can't use Chinese weapons nor can it interface with Chinese AWACS or other radars. Either the Chinese Military Command isn't very competent with how they are spending their money or they have serious doubts about the J-11D's abilities when they still go ahead and procure approximately 2 squadrons of Su-35s. And before the "China needs engines" excuse is pulled to justify the purchase of the Su-35, the 117S is export approved and I doubt Russia would object if China just ordered a large batch of 117S engines instead of the Su-35.

    As for the J-20. It is pretty cool seeing how a fully matured MiG 1.44 may have looked like along with other stolen technology from the US. Like the F-35's EOTS. I am starting to doubt that I will ever see the day when the Chinese produce a fighter without "referencing" someone else's design.

    Honestly, it's probably mostly about the engines. If Chinese tech is so inferior why are they only buying 24 of them? And I've read that Su-35 must be able to interface with Chinese AWACS and radars. Otherwise it would make absolutely no sense to buy them. All in all, it seems to me that the importance of this deal should not be exaggerated to one way or another.

    J-20 is not a copy of MiG 1.44, WTF! And yes, J-20 has an EOTS too, so it must be a copy! It's these fucking "double standards" that piss me off... When Chinese weapon systems have some similar characteristics to some of their foreign counterparts, they must automaticallybe copies! You know... competing systems often tend to look quite similar throughout the history... OMG! How can that be! Chinese designers have to follow the same laws of aerodynamics (and physics) as everyone else... How dare they! And there's absolutely no fucking proof about copying in most cases. It's all media speculation and anti-Chinese propaganda. Of course the Chinese Flankers (or rather, their airframe) were originally copied from Su-27, that is blatantly clear. But J-20? Or even J-31? Total BS. It's so funny... Mitsubishi ATD-X, the Korean KF-X and Saab 2020 are not copies of F-35, but J-31 is? Logic!

    These Chinese advancements are totally logical and expected when you look at the overall strength of the country, the size of its economy, R&D and military budget. It should not come as a surprise to anyone, FFS.    

    It will will be always about the engines and the armament. Basically the computing power and radar can be dealt with, like the Koreans with their own auto engines. They were poor and classic but with a little beefing up, you wouldn't make a difference between them and german cars.

    So baasically, they need the sampling, it will be always about the sampling. Now the J-20 has a lot of things going through the 1.44 lineage. Off course that doesn't mean much. But the fact is though that the J20 has possibly worse engines than the 1.44.  There's also the fun part about chinese weapons, so far, the Chinese armament has been conservative, taking from foreign systems what it needed. The best example is the HJ-12 (Javelin Tse Toung). Which doesn't mean it is a bad thing, just showing that on many aspects the Chinese will be conservative and will wait for someone else to break through. They weren't copied, they were reverse engineered for the most part on the J11's from C on. And they didn't need to copy, they just exceeded the licence they had. So yeah, the Chinese play dirty sometimes, and I understand that they need to, because of their relative need to catch up.

    Well as for the rest, the size of the economy doesn't explain much there. There are vast domains in which the Chinese with all those trillions roll in 1980 level tin boxes or have the equivalent of Desert Storm era radios. Now let's not get ahead of our times here. China is catching, granted, but they have a huge amount of consolidation to do.

    For instance they have to make up their mind about their infantry rifles, infantry doctrine and overall have some fighting experience.


    Well, exactly. China did "copying", and they had to, in order to catch up. But now that is needed less and less. And regarding Flankers: they have mastered building them and they have hundreds built and in service. That is their main (and only) heavy 4th gen fighter. Why not keep building improved variants (J-11D) and "sampling" (or whatever you want to call it) the best versions the Russians have to offer? And yes, both MiG 1.44 and J-20 have delta-wings and canards. But does that make J-20 a copy? Hell no.

    And I didn't say that the Chinese military is 100% "modern". Of course not. I was talking about the new equipment they are procuring. And to be fair, the ground forces are not their priority.

    But this getting off-topic. The end.

    Sponsored content

    China's copy of Russian military equipment - Page 3 Empty Re: China's copy of Russian military equipment

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Sep 16, 2019 3:21 pm