J-15 carrier-borne fighter thread

R

Richard Santos

Captain
Registered Member
fatfreddy said:
Thats a good point and one I have been posting on other chat groups. This is equally applicable to other technologies which EU and North America has refused to sell to China. The danger is that their IP becomes valueless when China is forced to develop their own and actually develops something more powerful and cheaper. The Space Station is one example. The supercomputers are another. There are many others. Sales of chip design and production companies are also blocked. So China will be forced to develop their own. Looking at the fastest supercomputers in the world now, it won't take long become before China builds their own indigenous technologies and plants.
Click to expand...


No, it is fundamentally not applicable to the US and the EU. Russia is a declining has been, lacking capital and infrastructure to keep up with pace in development in virtually all technological field. All it has are a few narrow defense related expertise built up at exorbitant cost under the Soviet Union that it can sell for some cash to make the most of what it has before its static position is overtaken even by second tier technological powers like china and no longer has anything worthwhile to sell other than raw natural resources.

Both the US and the EU are still world leaders in cutting edge development. While china has advanced faster than the US and EU, that was largely because china was retreading steps already taken by the others. China has not demonstrated anything like the ability to,advance the state of the art as fast as the US and EU when the path has not been illuminated by others who had come before. So the US and EU are not just looking to maximize the value of what they already have. They have good reason to believe they can maintain some technological margin over china for a long time to come. If they freely give to,china, they will still be able to maintain a margin on a on going basis. But a razor thin one. If the embargo china, they will continue to main a margin, but a significantly thicker one. Obviously sustaining a thicker margin is better.
 
szbd

szbd

Junior Member
Richard Santos said:
No, it is fundamentally not applicable to the US and the EU. Russia is a declining has been, lacking capital and infrastructure to keep up with pace in development in virtually all technological field. All it has are a few narrow defense related expertise built up at exorbitant cost under the Soviet Union that it can sell for some cash to make the most of what it has before its static position is overtaken even by second tier technological powers like china and no longer has anything worthwhile to sell other than raw natural resources.

Both the US and the EU are still world leaders in cutting edge development. While china has advanced faster than the US and EU, that was largely because china was retreading steps already taken by the others. China has not demonstrated anything like the ability to,advance the state of the art as fast as the US and EU when the path has not been illuminated by others who had come before. So the US and EU are not just looking to maximize the value of what they already have. They have good reason to believe they can maintain some technological margin over china for a long time to come. If they freely give to,china, they will still be able to maintain a margin on a on going basis. But a razor thin one. If the embargo china, they will continue to main a margin, but a significantly thicker one. Obviously sustaining a thicker margin is better.
Click to expand...
well, if they embargo, then they need to spend a lot of money to ensure the embargo and forget about the money they can make if there's no embargo. The whole thing is they can't go forward without China now. Unless you want your stuff just stay in lab and keep burning money.
 
Jiang ZeminFanboy

Jiang ZeminFanboy

Senior Member
Registered Member
How many and which type of J15 is gonna be used by a new 001A aircraft carier ?
Does the new batch of J15 will be using the AESA radar ?
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Richard Santos said:
No, it is fundamentally not applicable to the US and the EU. Russia is a declining has been, lacking capital and infrastructure to keep up with pace in development in virtually all technological field. All it has are a few narrow defense related expertise built up at exorbitant cost under the Soviet Union that it can sell for some cash to make the most of what it has before its static position is overtaken even by second tier technological powers like china and no longer has anything worthwhile to sell other than raw natural resources.

Both the US and the EU are still world leaders in cutting edge development. While china has advanced faster than the US and EU, that was largely because china was retreading steps already taken by the others. China has not demonstrated anything like the ability to,advance the state of the art as fast as the US and EU when the path has not been illuminated by others who had come before. So the US and EU are not just looking to maximize the value of what they already have. They have good reason to believe they can maintain some technological margin over china for a long time to come. If they freely give to,china, they will still be able to maintain a margin on a on going basis. But a razor thin one. If the embargo china, they will continue to main a margin, but a significantly thicker one. Obviously sustaining a thicker margin is better.
Click to expand...


At the moment, China is using its competitive advantage in terms of ultra-fast development speed, manufacturing ecosystem and low costs. This means that it is better to just take technological developments (wherever they come from), and commercialise them first with the best products. The Boston Consulting Group has noted that China spent more than the USA on commercial R&D for new products/processes back in 2014.

China already devotes 2.1% of GDP to R&D spending, which is higher than the European Union.
Furthermore, the target is 2.5% by 2020, and presumably 3% by 2025. Note that the USA is only spending 2.7%.

When combined with the size of China's economy, and as China moves up the value-chain, it almost certainly means Chinese scientists will be at the cutting edge of technological development.

Plus you forgot to mention Japan, Taiwan and South Korea as also being at the cutting edge of technological development.
 
danielchin

danielchin

Junior Member
This guy (LIANG WU JIU) claimed the CATOBAR J-15s have entered service.
Attached photos look old, but it makes sense since CATOBAR version can operate both on CV-16/17 and the coming 003.
____%202017-09-16%20__11.43.40.png
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top