Please elaborate on how the UK "stole" the F-35 design. The UK is buying a total of 138 F-35s from the US including licensed technology transfer. Where is the theft of the F-35 design happening, and can you substantiate any of it with anything other than statements from yourself? As for the Harrier, if you are referring to the McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II that the US manufactured, that was an Anglo-American joint development of the British Hawker Siddely Harrier. Again, no theft of anything. Any other irrelevant planes you want to throw in there to try and muddy the waters?
As for the Chinese "license buy" from Russia, it's not rocket science, which means that if you're still arguing about it, you have ulterior motives. It's VERY simple: the Chinese contracted with the Russians to locally produce 200 Su-27s (as the "J-11") using Russian-supplied kits. After producing about a hundred, the Chinese decided to stop producing using the Russian kits. By that time they had mostly absorbed the technology of the Su-27 and were going to indigenize the design and produce the design locally as the J-11B using many but not all locally-made subsystems; the engine especially was not locally-produced until later batches as the WS-10A was still having reliability problems for several years. There are now several hundred J-11 and variants produced by China. Again, the original license was for 200 Su-27 builds using Russian-supplied kits. To imagine that the Russians gave permission for ANYTHING beyond exactly this is to be utterly delusional and/or intellectually dishonest. This is a clear technology theft from China of the Su-27 design.
BTW, I'm still waiting for evidence of that Chinese stealth ASCM with cooperative engagement and "ECM". Where is it?
No, I have not ignored anything. Actually you are the one ignoring my statements. I clearly made reference to this point when I made statements like "Not in every last detail and modernizations aside" and " The Russians did NOT give permission for China to copy (and subsequently modify) the design and thereafter produce several hundred more using local subsystems". So why did you ignore these statements? I am fully aware of the development history of the J-11, including the desire on the PLAAF's part to use Chinese weaponry.
Nobody including me is saying that the J-11B is an exact one-for-one copy of the Su-27. This is a total straw man that doesn't stand up to scrutiny, not least because of the well-known reason that China wanted the Su-27 to launch local weapons. But the avionics were definitely wholesale reverse-engineered from the Su-27, as China had nothing similar to the Su-27 at the time it was copied. Pointing out exceptions like the radar and software is to completely ignore the dozens to hundreds of other Su-27 subsystems that the Chinese certainly had to copy and reverse-engineer from the original design to make the J-11B flyable. Additionally, while Chinese engineers almost certainly identified and improved some deficiencies in the original Su-27 airframe given their now intimate knowledge of the design, the J-11B airframe is in general a wholesale reverse-engineering of the Su-27 airframe. We can call the J-11B a "variant" if it makes us sleep better at night and quibble about what "copy" really means, or how much copying is still considered copying, but in the end the Chines stole the Su-27 design without Russian permission and are now making derivatives of the Su-27 in the hundeds (?thousands), way beyond the wildest imaginations of what the Russians ever intended or gave permission for. If this situation had been reversed, the fanbois here would be screaming their pretty little heads off at the thieving Russians.
