PLAN Aircraft Carrier programme...(Closed)

Blackstone said:

So, we simply disagree on how much Shenyang will copy from Foggy Bottom sources and now much it will develop on its own. I think it's more likely Shenyang will copy as much as possible, evaluate, innovate, and then produce. That's like how it copied, evaluated, innovated, and mass produced the J-11s and J-15s.

Click to expand...

I think its your underlying premise that people have problem with.

Your default assumption is that China will seek to steal a design first, irrespective of what it is you are talking about.

In reality, you would only be interested in seeing how someone else has done something if there is some value in doing so. Espionage is not free of cost or risk, and would only be employed where it is deemed a worthwhile expenditure of resources and exposing assets to the risks involved.

For something as basic as a landing gear, there is absolutely zero reason why China would bother to actively employ covert means to get plans or working examples of them.

To suggest China would need to resort to espionage for something so basic can be taken as a slight against the intelligence and competence of Chinese engineers.

There will almost certainly be a "shopping list" of certain technologies that Chinese intelligence would have identified as top priority acquisition targets, which would have been decided upon with input from industry and research experts, but naval fighter landing gear most certainly would not get on that list.

If the Chinese stumble upon plans or physical examples of such while looking for other things, they may acquire them and pass them on to SAC, but SAC (or whatever the relevant company) should already be well underway with their own research and development on that.

So far from having copy as the first go to option, it is probably at the very end of the available options list, to only be resorted to if domestic sources are unable to solve the technical problems and produce the thing themselves.

test bd said:

Believe it or not I never ever read or heard the term CATOBAR until I started visiting military forums. This term is not used in the USN...never.

If a J-15 can take a arrested landing it could take a cat shot with little modification.

Click to expand...

CATOBAR? Whats that????

Enywho... you fellows need to watch this video about what it takes to for an aircraft to have sea legs...just watch it. Despite it's 35 years of age the information has not changed. And yes I've posted this before.

plawolf said:

I think its your underlying premise that people have problem with.

Your default assumption is that China will seek to steal a design first, irrespective of what it is you are talking about.

In reality, you would only be interested in seeing how someone else has done something if there is some value in doing so. Espionage is not free of cost or risk, and would only be employed where it is deemed a worthwhile expenditure of resources and exposing assets to the risks involved.

For something as basic as a landing gear, there is absolutely zero reason why China would bother to actively employ covert means to get plans or working examples of them.

To suggest China would need to resort to espionage for something so basic can be taken as a slight against the intelligence and competence of Chinese engineers.

There will almost certainly be a "shopping list" of certain technologies that Chinese intelligence would have identified as top priority acquisition targets, which would have been decided upon with input from industry and research experts, but naval fighter landing gear most certainly would not get on that list.

If the Chinese stumble upon plans or physical examples of such while looking for other things, they may acquire them and pass them on to SAC, but SAC (or whatever the relevant company) should already be well underway with their own research and development on that.

So far from having copy as the first go to option, it is probably at the very end of the available options list, to only be resorted to if domestic sources are unable to solve the technical problems and produce the thing themselves.

Click to expand...

My first assumption is all nations spy, steal, and misdirect each other. I have absolutely no problems with that if it's necessary to pursue their national interests. The onus is on other nations to maintain security; US is great at it, and it's unrealistic to expect less from other nations. In context of Shenyang, we already know it copied the Su-27 without licencing, and that establishes its willingness and actions to steal technology for its own use. Again, I see nothing wrong with that in service of national interests; the variable is cost/benefit for involved parties.

This brings us to J-15 landing gears; I'll go on the limb and say few/none of Shenyang's engineers have designed CV aircraft landing gears, so the process is relatively new to them. There's a saying about not reinventing the wheel, and I'm sure Shenyang designers might consider they'd benefit from tried and true copy/innovate method that has served China so well. I have no doubt R&D team would apply lessons learned in future indigenous designs, but the probability is high first try on the J-15 will incorporate designs and manufacturing processes from purchased or stolen technology.

delft said:

All students in aeronautical engineering will have been taught the principles of undercarriage design and many of them will have been given the aspects relevant to catapult launch. It is then just designing, making and testing like all other engineering. There is nothing magical.
Really OT:
How can Foggy Bottom, the State Department, know anything relevant to this matter?

Click to expand...

There's a difference between knowing principles and applying it in the real world, and the more complex the subject, the greater the margins. Also, stealing technology one doesn't have is a tried and true way to inject R&D expertise.

Blackstone said:

Shenyang probably has stolen landing gear designs of various catapult-capable aircrafts, so modifying J-15 front gear shouldn't be a problem.

Click to expand...

By saying the above, you have made two underlying assumptions.

1) Chinese engineers are so incompetent that they have to depend on someone else just to breathe. It is clear that you have grossly underestimated the capabilities of the Chinese engineers. Keep in mind that China has been under a strict arms embargo since 1989. I think we all agree the scale of China's military development is huge. Just go through the threads here at the Sinofefence forum, you can see the qualitative and quantitative advancement in China's military development. Even assuming that Chinese spies have managed to obtain certain sensitive info, can you imagine how much top-secret info they would have to "steal" to maintain such cut-throat pace of tech development in China? It would be humanly impossible.

2) China's spies can get classified info from the west whenever they feel like it and however much they feel like it. It seems that every time China tries to develop something news, some people suspect that they have stolen classified data from the west. That would imply the western counterintelligence is as leaky as Swiss cheese. These counterintelligence agencies might as well close their doors and go home cause the Chinese spies have been able to get their secrets as easy as reaching into their own pockets. It is clear that you have grossly underestimated the capabilities of the western counterintelligence.

I think the truth should be somewhere in between. Chinese scientists and engineers are highly capable. At the same time, western counterintelligence is also highly capable. As such, the Chinese have been able to obtain some info. However, the Chinese scientists and engineers would have to do the bulk of the work themselves because China has been under strict arms embargo.

Blackstone said:

There's a difference between knowing principles and applying it in the real world, and the more complex the subject, the greater the margins. Also, stealing technology one doesn't have is a tried and true way to inject R&D expertise.

Click to expand...

It is often more difficult to understand the design from someone else because it includes considerations that are not relevant to oneself. In that case not stealing technology is the faster way. You will of course look at all information freely available but to go in for spying on undercarriages is likely to be a waste of time and effort.

vesicles said:

By saying the above, you have made two underlying assumptions.

1) Chinese engineers are so incompetent that they have to depend on someone else just to breathe. It is clear that you have grossly underestimated the capabilities of the Chinese engineers. Keep in mind that China has been under a strict arms embargo since 1989. I think we all agree the scale of China's military development is huge. Just go through the threads here at the Sinofefence forum, you can see the qualitative and quantitative advancement in China's military development. Even assuming that Chinese spies have managed to obtain certain sensitive info, can you imagine how much top-secret info they would have to "steal" to maintain such cut-throat pace of tech development in China? It would be humanly impossible.

Click to expand...

You're off base here. I don't assume Chinese scientists, engineers, and technicians are incompetent at all, just the opposite. The far opposite.

2) China's spies can get classified info from the west whenever they feel like it and however much they feel like it. It seems that every time China tries to develop something news, some people suspect that they have stolen classified data from the west. That would imply the western counterintelligence is as leaky as Swiss cheese. These counterintelligence agencies might as well close their doors and go home cause the Chinese spies have been able to get their secrets as easy as reaching into their own pockets. It is clear that you have grossly underestimated the capabilities of the western counterintelligence.

Click to expand...

Your argument isn't with me but with US security experts inside and outside of the government. Fair readings of media stories suggest there's consensus among security experts that China runs some of the most powerful and capable Intelligence Services in the world, and practically all Western companies with sensitive information or IP have either been hacked by China or don't know they have (their words, not my).

I think the truth should be somewhere in between. Chinese scientists and engineers are highly capable. At the same time, western counterintelligence is also highly capable. As such, the Chinese have been able to obtain some info. However, the Chinese scientists and engineers would have to do the bulk of the work themselves because China has been under strict arms embargo.

Click to expand...

I can't say you're wrong, since our disagreement is on the balance between indigenous development and pilfered technology. It could be as you suggest, but I'm not yet sold on that. I will change my views with sufficient evidence to the contrary.

Guys ... can we stop this "Chinese can only copy what they steal via espionage" vs. "what's real and true indigenous engineering and technical breakthrough" ??? ... at least here, since we are already way-off from the original topic !

Thanks.

Deino

bd popeye said:

CATOBAR? Whats that????

Enywho... you fellows need to watch this video about what it takes to for an aircraft to have sea legs...just watch it. Despite it's 35 years of age the information has not changed. And yes I've posted this before.

Click to expand...

Here's another good one...this one was a carrier pilot training film.

Is this the hangar of 001A? (posted at cjbdy and said it was assembled today)