China Flanker Thread II

Discussion in 'Air Force' started by sumdud, Jan 12, 2008.

  1. xywdx
    Offline

    xywdx Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2009
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    0
    IIRC there was a post somewhere on this forum where a member compared the Cockpit view between J-11A and J-11B?
    I remember there was a huge difference, J-11A looked like something from the 70s, while J-11B looked far more modern.
     
  2. lilzz
    Offline

    lilzz Banned Idiot

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    442
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG]

    some said that's J-15 with canard. not clear from this angle
     
  3. optionsss
    Offline

    optionsss Junior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    177
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh really? Would you please cite the contract terms that China violated?
     
  4. Centrist
    Offline

    Centrist Junior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    441
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is a pointless argument, Russia gave China the right to produce 200 J11's. The Russians deem the J11B to be in violation of the agreement. The Chinese have a different way of looking at it. None of us have seen the actual wording used in the contract, therefore we cannot say with any certainty at all who is right. There may be interpretive issues at play that none of us can qualify.
     
  5. Centrist
    Offline

    Centrist Junior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    441
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's pretty clear that there are canards there. From what we can tell, the J15 also has a shortened "stinger" as well. But I am personally interested as to why the engine nozzles look different...anyone have any info on that?? Are the TVC or some improved version of the WS10? Some websites have called it the WS10H, but does a new engine need to be developed to withstand a carrier landing?
     
  6. HKSDU
    Offline

    HKSDU Junior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Messages:
    393
    Likes Received:
    6
    Did i say Israel built their own? Nope. I said Israel modified them further. I know the story behind the F-15, I was using it as an example, and not going into further detail cause this is a flanker thread. You keep repeating yourself saying its violation, and how its not license. Please explain instead of just giving a statement.
     
  7. maya
    Offline

    maya New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2009
    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    0
    the marinization of Taihang engine is under development. i think initial J-15 demonstrator/prototype still be equipped with AL-31Fs.as chief designer Zhang said, the mature engine powered the new aircraft.
     
  8. pla101prc
    Offline

    pla101prc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2008
    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    82
    what kind of radar will J-15 be equipped with?
     
  9. ZTZ99
    Offline

    ZTZ99 Banned Idiot

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Messages:
    186
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is just unnecessary obfuscation. Whether the designation of "A" and "B" are official is COMPLETELY irrelevant. The A version is the one under contract that China is legally able to license produce. The B iteration is the "indigenous" version which uses the stolen intellectual property of the Sukhoi company to manufacture a modified aircraft that is more suited to PLAAF's current requirements. That you are even arguing about this is simply astonishing to me.

    What makes you think I don't know the actual story behind it? Don't put words in my mouth. What does the fact that the J-11A contract wasn't finished have anything to do with anything? Again, this is just noise rather than signal. If China didn't want to build all 200 J-11A's, that's its own business. What's NOT its business is to then take the intellectual property of Sukhoi, modify it without permission, and make several hundred more aircraft. The Israeli F-15 example is completely irrelevant. The Israelis are not building additional F-15's, modified or not. The Chinese ARE building modified Su-27's in the form of the J-11B. Just because you add your own components doesn't mean you somehow acquire the right to use the Sukhoi design, tweak it, and then call it your own.

    So according to you as long as the sum total of J-11A's + J-11B's = 200 or less, China is legit? What's the likelihood of J-11B production being less than 200? Probably zero. There are already probably that many J-11B's in service, being certified, or on the production lines, with many more to come, to speak nothing of J-11A's that have been flying around for years.

    China stole Russian intellectual property. It's kind of shameful that you people are trying so hard to make it not so. You would be the same ones sh&tting bricks if China gave license production of the J-10 to Pakistan, who then decided to modify the design out of contract and produce 500 more on its own without permission.
     
  10. plawolf
    Offline

    plawolf Brigadier

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,214
    Likes Received:
    12,887
    And you would know this because you saw the original contract?

    If not, kindly stop trying to pass off your own opinion as fact. :rolleyes:

    The fact is that the licensing agreement has always stated that there would be an ever increasing share of Chinese made components used in the aircraft, and the Russians never had any problem with that until the J11B came out.

    "The breakthrough in engine manufacturing technology allowed China to increase its share of domestically developed components and technologies from 70-75% to over 90%," the newspaper cited an official from the Russian state-controlled arms exporter, Rosoboronexport, as saying."

    China copies Su-27 fighter, may compete with Russia - paper | Top Russian news and analysis online | 'RIA Novosti' newswire

    The use of demostically made parts will begin after the first 60 are assembled using Russian kits and eventually 60-70% of the parts will be manufactured in China
    Chinese Military Aviation | China Air Force

    That means the original license agreement allowed China to add their own domestically made components onto the Russian designed airframe so there is blatantly no breach of the original contract.

    The only reason the Russians are trying to make a problem now is because of they fear that the J11B is superior to their own latest flanker derivative and so might take their diminishing share of the world fighter market were it ever offered for sale. But since China has neither exceeded the original contracted production numbers nor offered any J11 version for export, China has done nothing wrong.

    Again you make guesses and assumptions and pass them off as fact.

    China signed a license agreement with Russia that allows China to manufacture 200 Su27 airframes with increasing Chinese components as I have already established. The deal was for the airframes and never included engines or radar as Russia did not allow those technologies to be transfered. Thus China continuing to manufacture the airframes when the original contracted number has not been reached is in no way a breach. And since the original contract clearly allowed Chinese components to be used in the J11s, putting Chinese made engines and radars on the airframes is no breach either.

    And you are resorting to down right lies here.

    Where are these 'several hundred more aircraft' you claim China has made?

    SAC is still building J11s because they still hold the license to build more. Its in their contract and perfectly legal for them to continue to do so until the 200 units limit has been reached.

    And since when has China ever claimed that the J11 was Chinese designed? More lies.

    And you of course have proof that there are 'already more the 200 J11s'? :rolleyes:

    Keep repeating something will never make it true.

    China purchase the production license to the Su27 airframe so there was nothing 'stolen'. The fact that all this BS is about China putting in completely indigenous components makes it ever more ridiculous that anyone can claim that China is violating Russian IP.

    Russia never had a problem with China making Su27s using knock down kits while gradually increasing the percentage of components made in China. They even sent people over to help teach SAC how to make some of the components. That was fine, but as soon as China puts in Chinese designed engines and radar onto the airframe it becomes a violation of IP? Do you even understand what the concept of IP is? As your argument has it entirely backwards.

    Duplicating Russian tech without permission is violation of IP. Replacing Russian made components with entirely indigenously designed ones is not. At the very most the Russians can claim that such unauthorized mods would void any warranty. But that's hardly a violation of IP.
     
Loading...

Share This Page