Russia infuriated with Chinese export copies of Su-27 jet fighters

[ROCK45]

Russia infuriated with Chinese export copies of Su-27 jet fighters

If China did produce there J-11 in numbers and made sales just for example to African clients or others could they survive without Russian help? I’m not up to date on China jet engine production and if they could really go away from Russian made types completely. What other contracts or current projects might be affected if China did decide to make sales and went against Russia’s wishes on this matter? Could Russia afford to lose China as a customer down the road according to this article at least arm sales to China are down anyway? Does China produce a lot of there different weapons systems on there ships & subs or is that still an area where they depend on Russian gear? I would be interested in learning or seeing a current list of major orders/projects between Russia and China.

Air Force orders or projects
Naval orders or projects
Army orders or projects
Missile orders or projects


An article I found
Russia infuriated with Chinese export copies of Su-27 jet fighters
22.04.2008 Source: Pravda.Ru
URL: http://english.pravda.ru/russia/economics/104975-russia_china-0

Russia has officially notified China of the fact that the production of J11 jet fighters, which copy Russia’s Su-27SK aircraft, violates international agreements. Moscow promised to launch legal proceedings to protect its intellectual property.
Russia’s attempts to settle down on China’s arms market have been made to no avail, the Nezavisimaya Gazeta reports. Chinese pirates have entered a new level of activity. They mastered the production technology and developed the Chinese production of Su-27 analogues with a view to subsequently export the planes to third world countries.
The military cooperation between Russia and China has not been very successful during the recent couple of years. Russia’s arms exports to China dropped by 62 percent. In addition, Russia does not sign any new defense cooperation contracts with China. For the time being, the two countries simply execute the previously signed contracts, the sum of which total about $1.8 billion.
It is worthy of note that China used to be a major buyer of Russian-made military hardware. At present moment, China gradually becomes a large exporter of arms.
The Shenyang J-11 is an advanced fighter in the People's Liberation Army Air Force. It is a Chinese-redesigned, Chinese upgrade of the Russian Sukhoi Su-27SK.
The new J-11 is a Chinese redesigned version of the Sukhoi Su-27SK air superiority fighter. Sukhoi originally provided kits to Shenyang Aircraft Corporation upon an agreement in 1995, but over time there were to be increasing Chinese content in the aircraft, with up to 70% of all Su-27 ordered by the PLAAF to be Chinese-made. It has been reported that Sukhoi agreed to an upgrade program, allegedly in 2001, with improved radar and attack avionics.
However, in 2004, Russian media reported that Shenyang co-production of the basic J-11 was stopped after around 100 examples were built, citing a source within the PLAAF suggesting that the basic Su-27/J-11 was no longer meeting PLAAF requirements. The PLAAF later revealed a mock-up of an upgrade J-11C in late 2002. It was equipped with Chinese anti-ship and PL-12 air-to-air missiles presumably for the role for a maritime strike aircraft.
The Sukhoi Su-27 (NATO reporting name 'Flanker') is a jet fighter plane originally manufactured by the Soviet Union, and designed by the Sukhoi Design Bureau. It was intended as a direct competitor for the new generation of American fighters (which emerged as the F-14 Tomcat, F-15 Eagle, F-16 Fighting Falcon, and F/A-18 Hornet), with long range, heavy armament, and very high agility. The Su-27 most often flies air superiority missions, but is able to perform almost all combat operations. Its closest American counterpart is the F-15 Eagle.
Prepared by Dmitry Sudakov
Pravda.ru

Link
http://english.pravda.ru/russia/economics/22-04-2008/104975-russia_china-0

[Feanor]

Compared to the MKI and it's derivatives, the Su-27SK is pretty outdated. With the Su-35BM just around the corner (arms-tass mentioned it as one of the airplanes Libya may have purchased in the recent 2.5 billion arms deal) it shouldn't be a major export competitor.

[fltworthy]

Given China's past history of making knock-offs of Russian MiGs (which for decades were the backbone of China's air force), even the Russians shouldn't be surprised by this development. The real questions are how much of this presumed Russian angst is real, and how much is just posturing.

The following are the developments that we should watch for:
Are the Russians truly prepared to cut-off arms shipments to China? There are a number of outstanding contracts - most notably for the delivery of the AL-31F engines that power both China's Su-27s and J-10 fleet - that could be affected.


Is China prepared to export the J-11 without Russian approval and involvement? If so, I'd expect Russia to suspend a wide range of contracts with China, both military and non-military alike.


Will the Chinese-developed airplane develop quality issues as it ages? It will take a number of years to determine if this happens. When you reverse-engineer a product, you often don't know which features are critical and which dimensions can be allowed to float. That lack of underlying knowledge can show up in some nasty ways. China's entire Q-5 fleet was grounded for a time back in 1975, due to issues with the hydraulic system that cost a number of pilots their lives. Copying and modifying aircraft components is not the same as producing an automobile or tank. You can't park an airplane on a cloud when it breaks down.


Finally, have the Chinese really mastered the most complex subsystem of a modern jet fighter - it's engine? Chinese electronics can be substituted for Russian electronics. Aircraft components are mostly aluminum and titanium alloy - something that China should have experience with manufacturing from their days producing MiG knock-offs. But the engine adds a whole new level of complexity, with specialized alloys and manufacturing processes. China's experience producing MiG's won't help them here. Aircraft engine technology has changed significantly since the 1960s. Only time will tell if China's purported success with its WS-10A is real, or only a propaganda vehicle being used as a bargaining chip to secure better access to Russian technology.

If China has really matched the Russian manufacturing base - then I would expect to see China prepared to forge ahead as a one-on-one competitor for jet aircraft sales. There would be no reason to continue importing Russian engines, for example, if China really has mastered all that they claim they have. There would be no reason to re-sell Russian RD-33 engines to power Pakistan's JF-17, for example, if China thought they could produce an equivalent on their own.

More likely, however, is that there is a lot of maneuvering and posturing going on. China is not going to want to give up its access to Russian experience with the Su-27 until they know that they really have a viable home-grown option (that doesn't enter a mid-life crisis due to quality defects). The Russians in turn, will want continued access to China's defense market. I would expect to see a lot of bargaining going on during the coming months.

[XaNDeR]

Thats really nothing new China has been copy paste Russian tehnology since the start of the cold war.

[crobato]

The WS-10A is real for sure. The J-11B coming into service uses these engines, albeit in limited numbers. You seem to forget that when you manufacture the MiG knockoffs, you also manufacture the engines that power the knockoffs. And step by step, you go upwards like making Spey inspired engines like the WS-9 and mini turbines for the cruise and antiship missiles. The WS-10A is the final step towards putting the J-11B into serial production.

They do stress test these planes. We know they sacrifice a few airframes by shaking them into pieces. The first J-10 prototype had something like 4000 to 5000 flight hours before it was retired. The J-11B is made with an airframe life of 10,000 flight hours (stated by AVIC). Trainers like the L-15 go up to 12,000 flight hours. And yes they should know which features are critical; this is something called experience, and they have already at least four to five decades worth of that from building the first ever MiG in China, not to mention Tupolevs, Ilyushins and Antonovs. So the hydraulic system had a bug on the Q-5s in 1975, are you weighing some double standard here? Look at the record of both civilian and military aircraft, and you have many issues that cause grounding of entire fleets, even if the makers have half a century of making planes behind them. The Russians with much greater experience still had a major quality issue on the AL-31F engines in this decade from both its Chinese and Indian customers.

The J-11B is not for export, and there has never been an indication of such.

The Russians knew that China had been trying to produce their own Su-27 version since 2001. The Chinese didn't keep it a secret either, and in fact, announced that on June 2003, had the first successful flight test of a WS-10A on a J-11 testbed, and on December 2003, announced the first flight of the J-11B prototype on the PLAAF journal. And what did they do about it?

And there is no fervent discussion going on either about this matter.

[Viktor]

Well China military is most comprised of other nations weapon knock off. Most of its equipment is not designed on its own from start to end. From copy-pasting to stealing defence secrets China has being able to keep up (to the point) with the rest of the world.
No helicopter no plane has bein ever designed in China without anyones help or without copy-pasting. China still uses hundreds of copy-pasted Mig-21 and that says it all. Well thats not helthy way to go. Now that Russian defence budget is on the sharp rise and there is no lifting of EU arms embargo (cant realy relly on US too anymore) China will have to go on its own and I dont see them capable of keeping up with the rest.

They will sooner or later need to comply with the Russians in order to advance their military but than new sharper terms will have to be established as well as price.

China quaility control is another issue and story for itself.

[Schumacher]

.....
They will sooner or later need to comply with the Russians in order to advance their military but than new sharper terms will have to be established as well as price.
.........

Just as the article at at the top says exports have dropped & no more news contracts. Russia really needs to actually come up with products that work rather than relying on wishful thinking & salesman talk like yours here to get more contract let alone ones with better terms.

[tphuang]

oh dear, where do I start.
Given China's past history of making knock-offs of Russian MiGs (which for decades were the backbone of China's air force), even the Russians shouldn't be surprised by this development. The real questions are how much of this presumed Russian angst is real, and how much is just posturing.

The following are the developments that we should watch for:
Are the Russians truly prepared to cut-off arms shipments to China? There are a number of outstanding contracts - most notably for the delivery of the AL-31F engines that power both China's Su-27s and J-10 fleet - that could be affected.

the AL-31Fs ordered were for the old su-27s, not J-11B. The AL-31FN ordered are probably for a combination of new and replacements for J-10s. Most of the J-10s produced this year are expected to use wS-10A.

Is China prepared to export the J-11 without Russian approval and involvement? If so, I'd expect Russia to suspend a wide range of contracts with China, both military and non-military alike.

The entire part about China wanting to export J-11 has zero basis. There is no military contract left for the Russians to suspend other than possibly Mi-171. Not giving China the mass production deal for Mi-171 is the only one I can think of. Of the non-military ones, I suppose stopping energy export will be a huge threat, but then you are escalating this issue to a whole new level. China is certainly not afraid of playing hardball.

Will the Chinese-developed airplane develop quality issues as it ages? It will take a number of years to determine if this happens. When you reverse-engineer a product, you often don't know which features are critical and which dimensions can be allowed to float. That lack of underlying knowledge can show up in some nasty ways. China's entire Q-5 fleet was grounded for a time back in 1975, due to issues with the hydraulic system that cost a number of pilots their lives. Copying and modifying aircraft components is not the same as producing an automobile or tank. You can't park an airplane on a cloud when it breaks down.

read what Crobato has to say. No need for me to repeat

Finally, have the Chinese really mastered the most complex subsystem of a modern jet fighter - it's engine? Chinese electronics can be substituted for Russian electronics. Aircraft components are mostly aluminum and titanium alloy - something that China should have experience with manufacturing from their days producing MiG knock-offs. But the engine adds a whole new level of complexity, with specialized alloys and manufacturing processes. China's experience producing MiG's won't help them here. Aircraft engine technology has changed significantly since the 1960s. Only time will tell if China's purported success with its WS-10A is real, or only a propaganda vehicle being used as a bargaining chip to secure better access to Russian technology.

yes, it has reached mass production. The production level is expected to reach around 100 for this year.

If China has really matched the Russian manufacturing base - then I would expect to see China prepared to forge ahead as a one-on-one competitor for jet aircraft sales. There would be no reason to continue importing Russian engines, for example, if China really has mastered all that they claim they have. There would be no reason to re-sell Russian RD-33 engines to power Pakistan's JF-17, for example, if China thought they could produce an equivalent on their own.

RD-93 is only a temporary issue. WS-13 is only about a year away from certification. And unlike the Russians, China does not export its best stuff.

More likely, however, is that there is a lot of maneuvering and posturing going on. China is not going to want to give up its access to Russian experience with the Su-27 until they know that they really have a viable home-grown option (that doesn't enter a mid-life crisis due to quality defects). The Russians in turn, will want continued access to China's defense market. I would expect to see a lot of bargaining going on during the coming months.
lol, it's wholly indigenized. Any part that is not can easily be done so. The Russians are the ones that kept on delivering products that are below the expected performance to China.


No helicopter no plane has bein ever designed in China without anyones help or without copy-pasting. China still uses hundreds of copy-pasted Mig-21 and that says it all. Well thats not helthy way to go. Now that Russian defence budget is on the sharp rise and there is no lifting of EU arms embargo (cant realy relly on US too anymore) China will have to go on its own and I dont see them capable of keeping up with the rest.

which country did JH-7A get help or copy pasted from? Russians still have old Migs in their storage, what's your point? You are refusing to see facts, but relying on perceptions.


Compared to the MKI and it's derivatives, the Su-27SK is pretty outdated. With the Su-35BM just around the corner (arms-tass mentioned it as one of the airplanes Libya may have purchased in the recent 2.5 billion arms deal) it shouldn't be a major export competitor.

J-11B is not sk. Take a look at its subsystems first. Again, it's not available for export.

[Feanor]

If it's not available for export, and it's already less advanced then the MKI's sold to India, then I don't understand why Russian government is angry (except perhaps lost revenues of the additional SK sales).

[Falstaff]

Will the Chinese-developed airplane develop quality issues as it ages? It will take a number of years to determine if this happens. When you reverse-engineer a product, you often don't know which features are critical and which dimensions can be allowed to float. That lack of underlying knowledge can show up in some nasty ways. China's entire Q-5 fleet was grounded for a time back in 1975, due to issues with the hydraulic system that cost a number of pilots their lives. Copying and modifying aircraft components is not the same as producing an automobile or tank. You can't park an airplane on a cloud when it breaks down.


...

If China has really matched the Russian manufacturing base - then I would expect to see China prepared to forge ahead as a one-on-one competitor for jet aircraft sales.



This is a very important thing- manufacturing and material technologies and quality management are absolutely crucial aspects when producing (not only) fighter jets. If you reengineer something and you know how all the parts look like it still doesn't mean you know how to produce them properly.
In this respect our chinese friends still have a very long way to go, which is good for us, because e.g. all the chinese copies of german stuff miss german quality levels by a very wide margin. And then, if you leave the copy/paste-path you often still lack certain technologies you gain when you develop stuff over decades or even centuries instead of just copying, a very good example being chinese cars (e.g. the Brilliance, look at this crash test).
And then, the more complex something becomes, the more trouble-prone it is. Remember the bars that suddenly appeared on the J-10's air intake?

Nevertheless, they achieved a lot during the last decades, but I think in the foreseeable future those who can can afford them will buy western and russian fighters. Those who can't (or won't get them for political reasons, like Zimbabwe or Sudan) will buy chinese. No need to worry for the russians.

[crobato]

As for the Brilliance, the makers went back for another test in three months and managed to get a four star crash rating after the two stars they got from this one.

There is nothing "quality" about Russian jets to begin with, starting with the obnoxious hinge design on the IL-76, which if the door is sucked out would tear half the fuselage with it, to the rusting rivets in the Su-27s. One of the rationale in fact for the Chinese to produce their own jets was because of the quality issues they have on the Russian material. The Chinese nickname for the Su-27 in the PLAAF is the "Most" they say, requires most technicians to maintain, most defects.

What bars suddenly appeared in the J-10's intake? From the very beginning, the bars are there with prototype 01. In planes with side variable intakes using ramp design, you can see bars if you peep between the space between the main diverter and the fuselage. I don't really see anything wrong with that. Similar bars also appear on the MiG 1.44 project if you look closely.

Look at the J-7s. The original MiG-21F was a agile but limited design. While the Russians redesigned the Fishbed, which made the plane seriously gained weight and lost maneuverbility, the Chinese did expanded on the MiG-21F design by strengthening the wing to add two tanks; the original MiG-21F could not tank on the wings which seriously limited its operational range. From two pylons only the strengthened wing could now hold four pylons, with one point able to hold both a tank and an AAM at the same time. In the J-7E's wing, they wetted the wing so it could store fuel inside. The double delta with automated wing slats also featured an increase in wing surface area, and this helped improve the low speed abilities of the jet compared to the classic delta winged Fishbed. The adjustable intake is converted from a manual 3 position system to an automatic variable position system that adjusts based on wind speed and altitude.

[fltworthy]

You seem to forget that when you manufacture the MiG knockoffs, you also manufacture the engines that power the knockoffs.

The manufacturing technologies required for producing modern engines, like the AL-31F or RD-33/-93 are worlds beyond anything that goes into the older-generation MiG engines developed during the 1950s.

oh dear, where do I start.
RD-93 is only a temporary issue. WS-13 is only about a year away from certification.

So far, the WS-13 has only proven my point. Given the choice between buying a Chinese-developed JF-17 with a Russian-supplied engine, or buying the same airplane with a Chinese-developed engine, Pakistan has chosen to sign-up for the Russian engine. Whatever claims China's propaganda machine might want to make, when it comes time to put money on the table, no one (so far) has been willing to take their chances with the Chinese duplicate.

[crobato]

The manufacturing technologies required for producing modern engines, like the AL-31F or RD-33/-93 are worlds beyond anything that goes into the older-generation MiG engines developed during the 1950s.

It does not matter, since the WS-10 which was first flown in the nineties, and the WS-10A, which first flew in 2002, are already here and going in the J-11Bs. The Chinese do have single crystal blade technology since the early 2000s.



So far, the WS-13 has only proven my point. Given the choice between buying a Chinese-developed JF-17 with a Russian-supplied engine, or buying the same airplane with a Chinese-developed engine, Pakistan has chosen to sign-up for the Russian engine. Whatever claims China's propaganda machine might want to make, when it comes time to put money on the table, no one (so far) has been willing to take their chances with the Chinese duplicate.

Actually it was Pakistan that didn't like the Russian engine (still smoky and political liability) but had no choice on the matter until the WS-13 can be made ready.

[Falstaff]

What bars suddenly appeared in the J-10's intake? From the very beginning, the bars are there with prototype 01.

No, they were retrofitted for stability.

[Viktor]

Well Pakistan is opting for Italian radar as well for they FC-1 and that tells something too.

China army has gained boom in arms industry due to Russian willingless to permit weapos desigers knowledge flow to China ... witch had as a result lots of systems and subsystems China has being strugeling fr compleation for decades to be compleated and enter operational service. Most obivious thing is the number and scale of China weapons system operational introduced since it had good relations with Russians and ultill then.

Now when they are left on they own .. we will see what new systems will they introduce ...

[Schumacher]

...........

Now when they are left on they own .. we will see what new systems will they introduce ...

Well, PLA has shown little reluctance in the past to buy Russian IF the Russians can deliver better products than Chinese indigenous ones.
More than anything else, it's Russia's falling behind in its ability to meet PLA's requirements in terms of quality & capabilities that has boosted the Chinese indigenous arms industries.

[Schumacher]

If it's not available for export, and it's already less advanced then the MKI's sold to India, then I don't understand why Russian government is angry (except perhaps lost revenues of the additional SK sales).

Why are the Russians angry now ? Who knows ? Posturing to gain some advantage is routine in all kinds of dealings even far simpler than the ones between nations like this Sino-Russian one.
Maybe the Russians have finally realized no more major Chinese contracts will come ie the time has come to burn the bridges.

[Viktor]

Well, PLA has shown little reluctance in the past to buy Russian IF the Russians can deliver better products than Chinese indigenous ones.
More than anything else, it's Russia's falling behind in its ability to meet PLA's requirements in terms of quality & capabilities that has boosted the Chinese indigenous arms industries.



Well perhaps but I dont see it that way... China had no transport, airrefuling, AWACS, atack helo, modern bombers etc etc but choose to go on good knows what ways (with Ukraine, something from Belarus) etc ...

Russia in the meatime produced who loot of other system and are developing newer ones that are simply no where to be found in China inventory...

[Schumacher]

Well perhaps but I dont see it that way... China had no transport, airrefuling, AWACS, atack helo, modern bombers etc etc but choose to go on good knows what ways (with Ukraine, something from Belarus) etc ...
.........

My friend, it's not abt how one likes/dislikes to see it. :) The fact is China went from the biggest buyer to now an almost complete stop in new orders.
If it's indeed true PLA is buying from Ukraine, it probably shows Russian arms industries are not only falling behind Chinese ones but also other nations' as well.

[Viktor]

Why are the Russians angry now ? Who knows ? Posturing to gain some advantage is routine in all kinds of dealings even far simpler than the ones between nations like this Sino-Russian one.
Maybe the Russians have finally realized no more major Chinese contracts will come ie the time has come to burn the bridges.

Why are Russians angry ... well for instance .. China is bigest operator of P-18 Spoon Rest radar that guides about 65 HQ-2 (Russian copy-paste) batteries ... when Serbs shot down F-117 that was done with P-18 Spoon Rest radar who recived digital solid state upgrade by NNIIRT ... well China stole the tehnology that makes "stealth" fighters visible without paying to the Russians ... only one among hundreds of similar thifes acts ... so why are Russians mad ...LOL

If China has such great military industrial complex ...LOL they would produce somthing on they own ... but no

[SABRE]

Given China's past history of making knock-offs of Russian MiGs (which for decades were the backbone of China's air force) ...

In the past China has technically never made a knockoff of any Russian/Soviet fighter. The F-6 (MiG-19) was produced under license from USSR & the F-7 was/is just a MiG-21 lookalike (not MiG-21 itself).

The only proper copy is perhaps the J-11 = Su-27.

Is China prepared to export the J-11 without Russian approval and involvement? If so, I'd expect Russia to suspend a wide range of contracts with China, both military and non-military alike.

The new Chinese J-11, termed J-11B is not accountable to Russian license, in fact the Chinese have suspended the Russian license in order to produce their own version. In late 1960s PRC sold Pakistan F-6 fighters without the Soviet approval (& they did not require it since Soviet-PRC relations had gone cold. license was canceled & PRC was producing fighters on its own).

In recent times PRC was going to sell RD-93 engines to Pakistan without the approval of Russians. The Russians did confront the Chinese only to end up approving the sell.

If you ask me I don't think Russia is going to cancel or suspend its exports to PRC since China is the largest purchaser of Russian arms.

Finally, have the Chinese really mastered the most complex subsystem of a modern jet fighter - it's engine? ... Only time will tell if China's purported success with its WS-10A is real, or only a propaganda vehicle being used as a bargaining chip to secure better access to Russian technology.

I can't say whether WS-10A is really a master piece but it certainly could be the path to it. China is serious about engine making. WS-10A is not the only engine they are pursuing, WS-13 for JF-17/FC-1 is another project in its final phases.

Can't say that Chinese engines are bargaining chips against Russia but they can certainly act as one.

More likely, however, is that there is a lot of maneuvering and posturing going on. China is not going to want to give up its access to Russian experience with the Su-27 until they know that they really have a viable home-grown option (that doesn't enter a mid-life crisis due to quality defects). The Russians in turn, will want continued access to China's defense market. I would expect to see a lot of bargaining going on during the coming months.

I'll have to agree here. I don't see either of them going for a divorce any time soon. There will be quite more years in this marriage.

[Schumacher]

... only one among hundreds of similar thifes acts ... so why are Russians mad ...LOL
If China has such great military industrial complex ...LOL they would produce somthing on they own ... but no

'Hundreds' of acts of thefts huh ? Are U sure it's not 'thousands' of such acts ? Maybe 'millions' ? :)
The bottom line is the Russia had no problem hiding its 'anger' when the orders were flowing.
In the business world, it's common practice to send in the lawyers to settle all the 'bills' once it's clear the relationship is almost gone. Russia's action here looks very similar to this.
Maybe this 'anger' can motivate Russian arms industries to rise again so that Chinese orders will return. :)

...Can't say that Chinese engines are bargaining chips against Russia but they can certainly act as one. ....

I think that the approval of RD-93 despite initial threats already showed WS-13 was at least effective as a bargaining chip in that it made Russia fear losing to WS-13 eventually & leaving empty handed had they continue to withhold approval.

[Viktor]

Russians defence industry is on the sharp rise if you have not notice!

[SABRE]

Thread moved to military aviation forum where it should have been in the 1st place.

Posters please take care in where you are posting your Threads & Posts.

Thank You!

- SABRE

[Feanor]

In any event this is another copy of a fighterplane that will be outdated by the time the bulk of the PLA has it. It's also far behind available internationally MKI variants. This does not at all seem like a major incident in terms of the actual technology (at least not from a Russian perspective). I think you guys might be right that this is close to the end of Sino-Russian defense relationship and hence this is an attempt to at least close the door with a bang.

[tphuang]

Well Pakistan is opting for Italian radar as well for they FC-1 and that tells something too.

China army has gained boom in arms industry due to Russian willingless to permit weapos desigers knowledge flow to China ... witch had as a result lots of systems and subsystems China has being strugeling fr compleation for decades to be compleated and enter operational service. Most obivious thing is the number and scale of China weapons system operational introduced since it had good relations with Russians and ultill then.

Now when they are left on they own .. we will see what new systems will they introduce ...
No FC-1 is using Grifo S7. The first batch of FC-1s are completely using Chinese avionics.


So far, the WS-13 has only proven my point. Given the choice between buying a Chinese-developed JF-17 with a Russian-supplied engine, or buying the same airplane with a Chinese-developed engine, Pakistan has chosen to sign-up for the Russian engine. Whatever claims China's propaganda machine might want to make, when it comes time to put money on the table, no one (so far) has been willing to take their chances with the Chinese duplicate.

WS-13 still has 2 years to go before it's available for mass production if we go by the timeline of WS-10A, so it totally makes sense that Pakistan has to go for RD-93 right now.


No, they were retrofitted for stability.

try this http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/4283/j1001cg9.jpg
I've attached J-10 prototype 01 in there for evidence that it has always been there, why don't you show your proof.
If you look at the locations they were added, those are not the most optimal in terms of support. They were added for aerodynamic reasons.


Why are Russians angry ... well for instance .. China is bigest operator of P-18 Spoon Rest radar that guides about 65 HQ-2 (Russian copy-paste) batteries ... when Serbs shot down F-117 that was done with P-18 Spoon Rest radar who recived digital solid state upgrade by NNIIRT ... well China stole the tehnology that makes "stealth" fighters visible without paying to the Russians ... only one among hundreds of similar thifes acts ... so why are Russians mad ...LOL

If China has such great military industrial complex ...LOL they would produce somthing on they own ... but no

Other than Kolchuga, what other air defense radar did China import from Russians/Ukrainians, name one?
why do you name which new systems you think China copied and I will respond to that?


In any event this is another copy of a fighterplane that will be outdated by the time the bulk of the PLA has it. It's also far behind available internationally MKI variants. This does not at all seem like a major incident in terms of the actual technology (at least not from a Russian perspective). I think you guys might be right that this is close to the end of Sino-Russian defense relationship and hence this is an attempt to at least close the door with a bang.

to respond to this and your last post
1) J-11B is not inferior to MKI, if you think so, state why.
2) Russians are suing China because they are pissed off China did not let them on the J-11B project and are not going to buy su-35
3) This plane is not going on export market, the Russians are saying this to sound like the victim.

[Feanor]

why do you name which new systems you think China copied and I will respond to that?

T-55's? PT-76's? whether they were licensed or not doesn't matter. The point is that they were reliant on imported tech.


to respond to this and your last post
1) J-11B is not inferior to MKI, if you think so, state why.

We can start with lack of thrust vectoring, continue with smaller airframe (at least that's what the chinese claim), and finish up with lesser manufacturing experience of the family of aircraft.

2) Russians are suing China because they are pissed off China did not let them on the J-11B project and are not going to buy su-35

So it's over possible lost revenues of further sales to China. Dumb. It was definetly easy to forsee, and certainly doesn't help secure further defense orders.

3) This plane is not going on export market, the Russians are saying this to sound like the victim.

Well if the components are copied to a large enough extent to consider it patent violation then Russia is the victim, albeit a rather stupid one (given chinese history for borrowing foreign tech).

[Falstaff]

try this http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/4283/j1001cg9.jpg
I've attached J-10 prototype 01 in there for evidence that it has always been there, why don't you show your proof.
If you look at the locations they were added, those are not the most optimal in terms of support. They were added for aerodynamic reasons.


I know the pictures of prototype 01. I've been watching the development mostly on sinodefence for years and again, these bars were fitted later on (a fellow aircraft engineer speculated that the very large plate suffers from vibrations). While I'm searching my old hard drive backups for pictures, perhaps some of the senior members remember this too and can confirm it?

[tphuang]

I know the pictures of prototype 01. I've been watching the development mostly on sinodefence for years and again, these bars were fitted later on (a fellow aircraft engineer speculated that the very large plate suffers from vibrations). While I'm searching my old hard drive backups for pictures, perhaps some of the senior members remember this too and can confirm it?
I think you probably had some old PS or CG photos.


T-55's? PT-76's? whether they were licensed or not doesn't matter. The point is that they were reliant on imported tech.

more recent developments, please.


We can start with lack of thrust vectoring, continue with smaller airframe (at least that's what the chinese claim), and finish up with lesser manufacturing experience of the family of aircraft.

lighter vs smaller, different things. J-11B is lighter + has a higher thrusted engine -> better T/W ratio. I would say that's more important than having TVC. TVC's advantage really depends on who you are. As for less manufacturing experience, J-11B's airframe certainly has higher requirements in terms of service life than sk.


So it's over possible lost revenues of further sales to China. Dumb. It was definetly easy to forsee, and certainly doesn't help secure further defense orders.

That's what it appears to me.

Well if the components are copied to a large enough extent to consider it patent violation then Russia is the victim, albeit a rather stupid one (given chinese history for borrowing foreign tech).

Russians didn't think China could master the su-27 tech before the next generation of plane came along. They were right to a degree, because we are probably only 7 years from when 5th gen plane comes along. And by the time China is ready to export flankers, there probably won't be any takers. So, developing indigenous flanker variants is more about acquiring the ability to design and manufacturer large, multi-role fighters.

[Feanor]

more recent developments, please.

The Type-79 is still a T-54 development..... even the Type-85 still has distinctive features of Soviet tank design.

lighter vs smaller, different things. J-11B is lighter + has a higher thrusted engine -> better T/W ratio. I would say that's more important than having TVC. TVC's advantage really depends on who you are. As for less manufacturing experience, J-11B's airframe certainly has higher requirements in terms of service life than sk.

It has a smaller airframe. That means harder to modernize.

Also, my knowledge here is limited, does the J-11B carry anything GPS compatible in terms of navigations and targetting? And what's the range on it's radar in terms of air to air?

[flyboyEB]

China copying the Su-27? If they can rip-off some Eurofighters or F-22s they'd really be in business :D

[hellfire]

well i doubt a J11 is equal to a MKI,let alone be superior.i didnt read anywhere that J11 is superior ,from what i read from many articles and news ch the SU-35 is the only one superior to the MKI and i saw the show even on national geographic channel.

in these forums all i see ,is people supporting the aircraft there nations have including many moderators.
i like planes irrespective has to who has it.i may be a newbie in this forum but i have been reading about sukhoi from the past 12 years.hell i even have a radio controled sukhoi with turbine engine(well still havent bought the engine has yet) .:D

well russia will be pissed why shouldnt they i mean GM was pissed when some chinese manufacturer copied there vechicle SPARK,also another chinese maker copied honda SRV the chinese named it FRV.so those companies started sueing the chinese .:nutkick

[whodunit]

What does it matter when the chinese have already received their su-30mk's.

[crobato]

Russians defence industry is on the sharp rise if you have not notice!

You mean sharp decline. Algeria are not accepting their MiG-29s, Venenzuela is complaining, and India is gradually shifting to Western sources. China's defense budget is growing by double digits every year, while purchases to Russia is on a sharp decline in contrast. So where is all the money in the Chinese budget is going?

[crobato]

I know the pictures of prototype 01. I've been watching the development mostly on sinodefence for years and again, these bars were fitted later on (a fellow aircraft engineer speculated that the very large plate suffers from vibrations). While I'm searching my old hard drive backups for pictures, perhaps some of the senior members remember this too and can confirm it?

Why don't you go ahead and prove it? I dare you. Post pictures of J-10 01 without the bars and without attempting any PS on them. I got pictures of J-10 01 myself, probably more than you will ever have, some of them taken early in the project and none of them were without the bars. And it was no aircraft engineer that speculated the plate would have vibrations; it was KANWA's Pinkov which knows nothing on these matters at all, but claimed it was due to the weight of the engine tunnel that would force these vibrations.

[crobato]

The Type-79 is still a T-54 development..... even the Type-85 still has distinctive features of Soviet tank design.

If you mean the autoloader yes. If you mean the welded tank turret and the fire control systems, no.



It has a smaller airframe. That means harder to modernize.

Also, my knowledge here is limited, does the J-11B carry anything GPS compatible in terms of navigations and targetting? And what's the range on it's radar in terms of air to air?

No, the airframe is the same size as the Su-27SK and has the exact lines and dimensions. All the Flankers from the earliest to the latest have not changed in their dimensions at all.

The J-11B, like most modern Chinese platforms, should have GPS and Beidou, but will probably rely only on Beidou in wartime. Performance of radar is classified but should be better than the N001VEP series but behind any of the PESA or AESA types. The J-11B features a wide angle holographic HUD in addition to a cockpit with four MFDs plus a UV based EOS MAWS in four positions.

[ROCK45]

People have mentioned that the Su-35 is superior to MKI model but correct me if I’m wrong the Su-35 isn’t in full production yet? So nobody really knows if Russia improved on the non Russian systems built into the Su-30 Flanker MKI? With the more powerful engines and I think lighter weight one can assume a little better flying performance but still doesn’t mean the sub systems are better. Think about it India went with the non Russian systems for a reason and don’t seem to be jumping on the Su-35. Does anybody know if India upgrading any of there older Flankers with similar Russian sub systems in place of the non Russian made systems bought earlier? That would be a good benchmark I think most users would rather order the entire aircraft including sub systems unless it’s just too costly to replace.

[Viktor]

@ Crobado .. few questions

1. When will Beidu become operational?

2. What about China sea surveilence satelites that where suposed to guide China antiship balistic missiles (As I read few of them (1-2)have being lounched but they last only few years.

3. I sow China has stoped producing destroyers (only two 051C and 052C produced) .. whys that?

Tnx

[Feanor]

You mean sharp decline. Algeria are not accepting their MiG-29s, Venenzuela is complaining, and India is gradually shifting to Western sources. China's defense budget is growing by double digits every year, while purchases to Russia is on a sharp decline in contrast. So where is all the money in the Chinese budget is going?

Please show me the Venezuelan complaints. Last I heard on the issue were some negotiations on purchases of small attack subs, and possibly Su-35. As for India, there have not been any truly major benchmark contracts that would signal significant move away from Russia. Remember they latched on to the PAK FA and are co-developing the Brahmos. They used their option for additional T-90's for another 347 tanks. Finally they're purchasing additional MKI's. This doesn't look like a Western move in on the Indian market. Moreover the Gorshkov deal, which looked like it might fall through, is being renegotiated after all. Finally they're modernizing their MiG-29 force. Given all that, the chances of the MiG-35 in the MRCA competition also look pretty good (given it's commonality with existing Fulcrums, and the MiG-29K's which are being purchased for the Gorshkov, and most likely for the indigenous carrier).

No, the airframe is the same size as the Su-27SK and has the exact lines and dimensions. All the Flankers from the earliest to the latest have not changed in their dimensions at all.

I believe the Chinese claim for why it wasn't piracy was that the J-11B had a smaller airframe by something like 10%.

The J-11B, like most modern Chinese platforms, should have GPS and Beidou, but will probably rely only on Beidou in wartime. Performance of radar is classified but should be better than the N001VEP series but behind any of the PESA or AESA types. The J-11B features a wide angle holographic HUD in addition to a cockpit with four MFDs plus a UV based EOS MAWS in four positions.

Should have GPS or does have GPS?

The MKI carries PESA. N011-M Bars. There is speculation about upgrade to the Irbis eventually.

[Viktor]

You mean sharp decline. Algeria are not accepting their MiG-29s, Venenzuela is complaining, and India is gradually shifting to Western sources. China's defense budget is growing by double digits every year, while purchases to Russia is on a sharp decline in contrast. So where is all the money in the Chinese budget is going?


Russia is No.1 in the world in military sales and those are increasing each year .. so that says all about its quality as Russia is heavily investing in production lines and retooling as well as R&D of many new project.

Its military tides with India has never being batter.

[swerve]

Russia is No.1 in the world in military sales ...

Afraid not. The USA exports far more. Well over twice as much in 2006, for example.

SIPRI calculated that Russia exported more weapons (not military equipment overall) than the USA a few years ago, but that was at values set by SIPRI, not revenue, major items only, & transfers, not sales. It counted free & nearly free transfers, such as Leopard 1s handed over to Greece for the cost of shipping (to sweeten their Leopard 2 purchase), as sales, almost equivalent to new equipment, & ex-DDR MiG-29s given to Poland for 1 Euro as if they'd been charged at full price.

German transfers of secondhand tanks, etc. put Germany into 3rd place in that ranking, despite the low revenue from them, & Gorshkov boosted the Russian figure enormously. It's not an accurate indicator of the export success of Russian (or German) military industries.

But even according to that measure, the USA has been ahead (again) since 2005. In revenue from sales of military equipment the USA has been consistently top, far ahead of Russia, & the UK is not too far behind Russia.

[Viktor]

Well I dont understand a word of what you have just write. :)

Take a look at Russian weapon deliveries in 2007

http://mdb.cast.ru/mdb/4-2007/item_5/article_2/

.. Have you similar specs to show for Britain or US ... you said Britain is right after Russia witch I find hard to belive .. even US (althrow it could be)

Have you similar specs?

[tphuang]

The Type-79 is still a T-54 development..... even the Type-85 still has distinctive features of Soviet tank design.

I mean something within the past decade.


It has a smaller airframe. That means harder to modernize.

Also, my knowledge here is limited, does the J-11B carry anything GPS compatible in terms of navigations and targetting? And what's the range on it's radar in terms of air to air?
yes for GPS. Smaller airframe, I have no idea where you read that from, it's smaller than su-30s for obvious reasons, but it should be about the same dimensions.

As for radar, it should be better than Zhuk-MSE in terms of range, probably more than Bar also. Remember, J-10's radar was quoted as 150 km vs fighter sized target and J-11's radar radius is 1/3 larger. I have a post on this in my blog.


well i doubt a J11 is equal to a MKI,let alone be superior.i didnt read anywhere that J11 is superior ,from what i read from many articles and news ch the SU-35 is the only one superior to the MKI and i saw the show even on national geographic channel.

in these forums all i see ,is people supporting the aircraft there nations have including many moderators.
i like planes irrespective has to who has it.i may be a newbie in this forum but i have been reading about sukhoi from the past 12 years.hell i even have a radio controled sukhoi with turbine engine(well still havent bought the engine has yet) .

well russia will be pissed why shouldnt they i mean GM was pissed when some chinese manufacturer copied there vechicle SPARK,also another chinese maker copied honda SRV the chinese named it FRV.so those companies started sueing the chinese .

in that case, read what other people have to say.


What does it matter when the chinese have already received their su-30mk's.

they are no good.


People have mentioned that the Su-35 is superior to MKI model but correct me if I’m wrong the Su-35 isn’t in full production yet? So nobody really knows if Russia improved on the non Russian systems built into the Su-30 Flanker MKI? With the more powerful engines and I think lighter weight one can assume a little better flying performance but still doesn’t mean the sub systems are better. Think about it India went with the non Russian systems for a reason and don’t seem to be jumping on the Su-35. Does anybody know if India upgrading any of there older Flankers with similar Russian sub systems in place of the non Russian made systems bought earlier? That would be a good benchmark I think most users would rather order the entire aircraft including sub systems unless it’s just too costly to replace.

more modern avionics architecture, better T/W ratio, lower RCS, better radar and in general, the production capability of KNAAPO is better than IAPO.


Anyway, I summed it up in my blog as the following:
"First, I'd like to address the issue of the AL-31F engine. There is no doubt in my mind that most if not all of those engines are going to the existing fleet of Russian flankers. The fact is that AL-31F have really short service life, so it shouldn't be a surprise that China needs a large order of this engine as replacements for the ones on the existing aircrafts. The other issue is that production rate of WS-10A has reached the point where China simply doesn't need to buy AL-31F for new J-11Bs. If the flanker production rate is 17 per year as Pinkov previously stated, then having mass production of WS-10A should more than cover that + a portion of J-10s. And it's no secret that the Russians have been following the progress of J-11B development as much as they can. Earlier this year, one of the big shrimps stated that Russians accidentally saw the J-11B production lines and were surprised by the tooling and quality of the fighters. It was to the point that they decided to cut off on the supply of parts to China. This did not actually cripple J-11B program, but simply helped the domestic industry which was previously denied due to the powerful middlemen who were making money off the export transactions.

So, why now? Of course, the official explanation is that China is violating the terms of the agreement and that they are going to export to other countries. But in reality, it doesn't appear that China has any intention exporting a fighter that they can't get enough of. In fact, one of the problems of PLA is that SAC can't produce enough to supply both the navy and the air force. I'm not sure if this is a problem with SAC as mentioned by Pinkov or a problem with the suppliers. Either way, with China's need for strike fighters and naval fighters, SAC won't be looking at any export orders for a while. Even the big shrimps on Chinese bbs have mentioned that China can't even export the original su-27sk without Russian approval. As for the other violation, it's clear at this point that China has yet to even reach the original goal of 200 flankers. They produced 95 J-11s with various degrees of Russian contents. We've probably had at most 20 J-11Bs so far. So, the Russians are simply complaining because they are not getting the money from China ordering their parts for the aircraft. This is really ridiculous, since what Russians are willing to offer to China (N-001VE) is so outdated. Of course, they are not willing to offer the more advanced Irbis radar, because they want China to buy su-35 straight up. So, if they are not willing to offer avionics and engines that are up to par (compared to indigenous production), what right do they have to complain that China is using their own (and more advanced) avionics? The Russians must know all of this. Why are they still complaining? Well, they know they are not going to get any more orders for su-33/35 from China (despite what they are claiming to Pinkov) after seeing the success of J-11 program, so they are simply trying to get any money they can from China at this point. The threat of discontinuing military cooperations is certainly not going to scare that many people in PLA. In fact, it has been China that has canceled those annual meetings due to the problems with the IL-76 contract.
"

[swerve]

Well I dont understand a word of what you have just write. :)

Take a look at Russian weapon deliveries in 2007

http://mdb.cast.ru/mdb/4-2007/item_5/article_2/

.. Have you similar specs to show for Britain or US ... you said Britain is right after Russia witch I find hard to belive .. even US (althrow it could be)

Have you similar specs?

It's perfectly clear: Russia has never sold more than the USA. Russia shipped greater quantities (just) of heavy weapons, including secondhand & discounted items, for a short period a few years ago. Is that clear enough?

I can't be bothered to hunt down all the items, but in financial terms, the USA delivered about $14 billion worth, Russia about $5.8 bn, & the UK $3.3 bn in 2006. In terms of contracts, it was USA $16.9 bn, Russia $8.7 bn, UK $3.1 bn.

I note that several of those Russian arms sales were for upgrades or refurbishment of weapons sold - or given away - by the USSR, & two of the biggest customers are under embargo by Western suppliers. Very competitive. :D

[flyboyEB]

I can't be bothered to hunt down all the items, but in financial terms, the USA delivered about $14 billion worth, Russia about $5.8 bn, & the UK $3.3 bn in 2006. In terms of contracts, it was USA $16.9 bn, Russia $8.7 bn, UK $3.1 bn.

Out of curiosity, is Russian equipment dirt cheap compared to Western stuff or is there not much difference? I'm guessing that you'll pay more for (arguably better) US/British equipment than Russian.

[Waylander]

At least for heavy ground equipment one pays more for western equipment. One just has to look at the recent BMP-3, T-90,etc. deals and compare them with modern Leo IIs, CV90,...

[Falstaff]

Why don't you go ahead and prove it? I dare you. Post pictures of J-10 01 without the bars and without attempting any PS on them. I got pictures of J-10 01 myself, probably more than you will ever have, some of them taken early in the project and none of them were without the bars. And it was no aircraft engineer that speculated the plate would have vibrations; it was KANWA's Pinkov which knows nothing on these matters at all, but claimed it was due to the weight of the engine tunnel that would force these vibrations.

Now calm down a bit. I'm searching my HD backups as I told you. As soon as I find something I'll send it to you. Please forgive me for not having the whole day to do so. And you misunderstood me: It was a friend of mine, who is an aircraft engineer and studied at the same university and now works for BMW-RollsRoyce. And yes, you probably have more pictures and you know everything better than I do, you can run faster and you're a superior cook. Satisfied? If I find out the pictures I remember are PSed I will officially confess I was wrong.

[crobato]

Go ahead and if you can produce those pictures if ever. And you are right, I have a huge collection of J-10 pictures I have accumulated for years and years now tracking the evolution and progress of the plane, and includes that of the J-10 01. And I have never never seen it without the braces. And as I said, braces are commonly seen when you have intake diverter ramps this close to the skin of the fuselage, because you are drawing air near the boundary layer, which is highly compressed. That will naturally put stresses on the ramp. Actually, the braces on the J-10 is holding the intake, not the ramp itself, but it is understood if you design an intake with a splitter drawing air near the boundary layer, you're going to deal with these issues. Put it this way, the J-8II's intake also has these braces if you look between the intake splitter and the fuselage, and the J-10's intake is very similar to the J-8II's turned sidewards.

[Feanor]

I mean something within the past decade.

Aren't the chinese claiming to have developed the HQ-17 based on the S-300?

yes for GPS. Smaller airframe, I have no idea where you read that from, it's smaller than su-30s for obvious reasons, but it should be about the same dimensions.

As for radar, it should be better than Zhuk-MSE in terms of range, probably more than Bar also. Remember, J-10's radar was quoted as 150 km vs fighter sized target and J-11's radar radius is 1/3 larger. I have a post on this in my blog.

You said it's worse the PESA or AESA. The MKI carries PESA.

So, why now? Of course, the official explanation is that China is violating the terms of the agreement and that they are going to export to other countries. But in reality, it doesn't appear that China has any intention exporting a fighter that they can't get enough of. In fact, one of the problems of PLA is that SAC can't produce enough to supply both the navy and the air force. I'm not sure if this is a problem with SAC as mentioned by Pinkov or a problem with the suppliers. Either way, with China's need for strike fighters and naval fighters, SAC won't be looking at any export orders for a while. Even the big shrimps on Chinese bbs have mentioned that China can't even export the original su-27sk without Russian approval. As for the other violation, it's clear at this point that China has yet to even reach the original goal of 200 flankers. They produced 95 J-11s with various degrees of Russian contents. We've probably had at most 20 J-11Bs so far. So, the Russians are simply complaining because they are not getting the money from China ordering their parts for the aircraft. This is really ridiculous, since what Russians are willing to offer to China (N-001VE) is so outdated. Of course, they are not willing to offer the more advanced Irbis radar, because they want China to buy su-35 straight up. So, if they are not willing to offer avionics and engines that are up to par (compared to indigenous production), what right do they have to complain that China is using their own (and more advanced) avionics? The Russians must know all of this. Why are they still complaining? Well, they know they are not going to get any more orders for su-33/35 from China (despite what they are claiming to Pinkov) after seeing the success of J-11 program, so they are simply trying to get any money they can from China at this point. The threat of discontinuing military cooperations is certainly not going to scare that many people in PLA. In fact, it has been China that has canceled those annual meetings due to the problems with the IL-76 contract.
"

So the contract was for 200 Su-27SK to be license built in China. If China produces more then 200 Su-27SK/J-11B would that not violate the contract? You yourself mentioned high need for the planes.

Russia is No.1 in the world in military sales and those are increasing each year ..

Garbage Viktor, garbage. Listen to swerve. He has his numbers right. By the way MDB, a quite reputable publication, never claimed Russia was No.1 on the arms market. That is a claim you yourself have made based on practically nothing.

[crobato]

@ Crobado .. few questions

1. When will Beidu become operational?

2. What about China sea surveilence satelites that where suposed to guide China antiship balistic missiles (As I read few of them (1-2)have being lounched but they last only few years.


Beidou is operational and recently has been upgraded with new satellites. As for surveillance satellites, what do you mean they last only a few years? They are still there, operating but rendered obsolete by newer satellites. The "weather" (note quotation marks) Feiyun satellite used as an ASAT target was still operational, by the fact it could still heed commands and change orbits, but its functionality has long been overtaken by newer sats. China appears to have a record year last year sending up satellites and the plans are even more this year. Its almost like every month they're shooting up something to the sky.


3. I sow China has stoped producing destroyers (only two 051C and 052C produced) .. whys that?

Tnx

They produced two 052B, two 052C and two 051C. That's six destroyers in seven years. One reason for temporarily stopping and I mean temporarily stopping is that the shipyard making the 052C has been relocating the last two years or so, and has recently finished. It is expected that it will now start with the 052D, following the experiences of the 052C.

Another is that China is making the 054 series, and these frigates are almost physically as large as any destroyer, looking at the photos when the ships are side by side against a Sovremanny and even a visiting Arleigh Burke. The 054s clearly overlap into the destroyer role, much larger than the Ludas. I see the 052x series to be produced in limited numbers, but the 054x line to be much greater in numbers. So far six has been produced, two 054, four 054A, four ships alone being finished and commissioned in the space of a single year. And two more hulls are already spotted under construction.

[crobato]

So the contract was for 200 Su-27SK to be license built in China. If China produces more then 200 Su-27SK/J-11B would that not violate the contract? You yourself mentioned high need for the planes.

The contract was for China to have the option to purchase at least 200 kits, with varying degrees of Russian content, as a crutch to assist China to learn how to build the plane.

As for the "smaller" airframe, I don't know where this claim is at, every picture I have seen on the J-11B show it to be absolutely the same size as the J-11 that preceded it down to a tee. In fact, physically both planes are completely identical.

It is not the airframe that is smaller, but the fact the plane is several hundred pounds lighter, due to the substitution of composite and the use of lighter avionics. The picture of the KLJ-4 radar's back systems appears to only take half the volume of a N001.

The planes should have Beidou and commercial GPS as standard equipment, that's standard PLA fare for their modern equipment and extends to other things as well, considering they even got digital PDAs with Beidou for the standard troops. However, commercial GPS is not relied on during combat.

[Feanor]

So.... China has an unlimited production license?

[gf0012-aust]

This needs to stay on track at a civilised level. If it degenerates to ranting and defensive national hysteria then it will get locked for a few days

[crobato]

So.... China has an unlimited production license?

To be absolutely sure, the contract document has to be made public, which is not going to happen. China apparently treats it like the Z-9/Dauphine license. This is not a new development; Shenyang AC has a mock up of the Su-27 with PL-12s under the wing since 2001 in its corporate entrance hall, with the numbers "2001" on it. Russians go through Shenyang often. The Russians had seven years to nip this in the bud. China originally wanted a hybrid, where they can use the template to fit Chinese avionics and weapons such as PL-12 and YJ-83s and so on, to standardize with the rest of the aircraft. The Russians keep insisting on pushing a 100 percent Russian designed template, with major avionics and missile components still sourced from Russia to protect their own market, and at the same time, they want to keep the Chinese on a "degraded" state. Note that Chinese originally wanted the Zhuk-MSE, probably integrated with the PL-12 and YJ-83, but I wonder if the Russian general staff would allow such, since that would make superior to their own airplanes in the RuAF. The problem is that even within the PLAAF, everything even the J-7Gs to the J-8F are now using slotted array planar radars, but the Russians insist the Chinese should still use a Twist Cassegrain on the radar? Why does the Russians insist in forcing the Chinese to have a cumbersome dual logistical structure, where one side has to stock and maintain R-77s, while another side uses PL-12s, where both sides are not interchangeable?

I think the Russians had every opportunity to partner in an originally planned hybrid, but as talks collapsed and degenerated, and even the Russians withholding components, the Chinese simply engineered every Russian component out of the plane to make it 100% autonomously produced.

[Feanor]

So the dispute is one over the nature of the contract. If this goes to any sort of international arbitration we should be able to find out.

[crobato]

Unfortunately, reverse engineering isn't illegal, and trade disputes do not cover both arms trade and any matter of national security. Any country has the right to withhold information vital to its national security and that's clear even by international law. Which means that the Russians have zero recourse here other than to curtail their own exports to China, which would also hurt themselves more.

[Firehorse]

Well, the Chinese invented (http://inventors.about.com/od/chineseinventors/Chinese_Inventions.htm)silk, gunpowder, compass, paper, stirrups, mines, rockets (http://www.international.ucla.edu/eas/sum-inst/links/invent.htm), etc.
All those were reverse-engineered and used by civilians & militaries alike- so I agree, once some innovation is copied the monopoly is over! An AK-47 story is a case in point, and the Russians been complaining (http://www.danwei.org/intellectual_property/ak47_intellectual_property_blu.php)about it too! IMO, improving and changing design features isn't copying though- but if taken to court, they can cite their own inventions going back many 100s of years!

[Feanor]

Here's an interesting article I found about the subject matter.

Outside View: China's obsolete fighters

by Ilya Kramnik
Moscow (UPI) May 2, 2008
Earlier this year reports appeared in the media that China had copied Russia's Sukhoi Su-27 Flanker fighter and that its J-11 version, now manufactured in China, would be sold to third countries, undermining Russia's positions on the global arms market.

Although China has made some progress in adapting Russian designs and technology, it is still far from posing either a military or commercial threat to Russian aviation.

The Chinese aircraft industry evolved in the late 1950s with Soviet assistance, and soon mastered production of the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15 Fagot and MiG-17 Fresco fighters, the Ilyushin Il-28 medium-range bomber and other warplanes. Later China got more modern aircraft from the Soviet Union -- the Tu-16, the MiG-21, the Antonov An-12 and others.

By cooperating closely with the Soviet Union, China managed to create a modern air force by the mid-1960s. However, this progress was squandered, and the national aircraft industry began to stagnate, after the beginning of the Cultural Revolution in the late 1960s.

Throughout the 1960s and the 1970s, China failed to develop any new aircraft, instead manufacturing the Q-5 and J-8 -- revamped versions of the MiG-19 Farmer and MiG-21 Fishbed fighters.

Meanwhile, both the Soviet Union and the United States were developing fourth-generation fighters by that time. By the mid-1980s, the Chinese air force was lagging behind Russia and the United States by some 15-20 years.

Beijing mostly sold its obsolete warplanes to the poorest Third World countries, including Albania, Uganda and Bangladesh. China also exported its aircraft to Pakistan, a potential ally against India.

Chinese leaders eventually resolved to rectify the situation by purchasing up-to-date aircraft production technologies. In 1988 China bought production forms and records for Israel's Lavi multi-role fighter. Sixteen years later, in 2004, China mastered production of the Chengdu J-10 -- an essentially Israeli warplane featuring Russian avionics.

Moscow and Beijing mended relations in the late 1980s, leading in 1989 to the signing of several military-technical cooperation agreements that facilitated technology transfers.

Most importantly, Beijing received production forms, records and assembly kits for the Sukhoi Su-27, as well as several Sukhoi Su-30-MKK fighters from Russia. By mastering these advanced warplanes, China obtained superiority over its neighbors and gained an insight into the latest aviation technologies.

Nevertheless, Chinese engineers have so far failed to master production of the Sukhoi Su-27 Flanker's AL-31F power plant. Its Chinese copy, the WS-10A, is less fuel-efficient and has a shorter service life. On the other hand, the J-11B, an upgraded J-11 version, has a pilot-friendly cockpit with color LCD screens.

A new Sukhoi Su-27 radar reportedly developed by China has better specifications than the Soviet-made N-001 radar, but is inferior to Russia's more modern Irbis radar.

To sum up, China has managed to copy an aircraft developed in the early 1980s 15 years after the initial Sukhoi Su-27 deliveries, and 10 years after the first Chinese-assembled Sukhoi Su-27 performed its maiden flight.

But the prototype Sukhoi Su-27 and the J-11 are no match for the revamped Sukhoi Su-27SM fighters now being adopted by the Russian air force and the new Sukhoi Su-35BM, which has entered its testing stage.

Although the J-11 will carve out its own market niche, this does not mean that Russian-made aircraft will lose their popularity. Nor will China pose a greater military threat to Russia. It is evident that neither Moscow nor Beijing wants an open military conflict. Even if such a hypothetic conflict ever flared up, it would be decided by weapons other than advanced fighters.

(Ilya Kramnik is a military commentator for RIA Novosti. This article is reprinted by permission of RIA Novosti. The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.)

(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Outside_View_Chinas_obsolete_fighters_999.html

[crobato]

WS-10A is spec'ed for a longer service life---at least twice as long---as the Russian equivalent. As a matter of fact, every Russian engine the Chinese reverse engineered, from the WP-6 to the WP-13, had longer service lives than the original. However, the WS-10A might be somewhat a little heavier and a slightly larger diameter than the AL-31F, I suspect.

And its the AL-31F itself never lived up to its life specification. Instead of 1000 flight hours, the engine gets issues around 500 to 750 flight hours.

The KLJ-4 the Chinese developed for the J-11B has nothing to do with the Su-27's N001. It is a descendant and related to the KLJ-1 used on the J-8F, the KLJ-3 and KLJ-10 used on the J-10s, and the KLJ-7 used on the JF-17. It belongs to a family of radars that can be scaled with array, software and component changes. By rationalizing into the same family of fighter radars, the PLAAF fighters can hone commonalities into the maintenance, logistics, crew and pilot training.

The KLJ-4 is a mechanical slotted planar array radar, which by principle is simpler, lighter, mechanically more robust, has greater mechanical flexibility for better FOV, faster scanning rates, and a much better signal gain than the Twist Cassegrain design used by the N001. That alone makes the radar superior to the Su-27SM's N001V. Its not better than the Irbis, however the Irbis is not in service yet, and slotted array planars still get better FOV, lower power consumption, gets less sidelobs, and do pulse compression than PESA's.

[weasel1962]

Deleted

[gf0012-aust]

Unfortunately, reverse engineering isn't illegal, .


Actually it is. One of the conditions that China agreed to comply with when seeking WTO membership was that it would apply due diligence to issues of IPO breaches.

Reverse engineering by its very nature breaches numerous IPO Internationally enforceable caveats.

[Feanor]

So far there doesn't seem to be any Chinese desire to negotiate.

[weasel1962]

Deleted

[crobato]

So far there doesn't seem to be any Chinese desire to negotiate.

They have not negotiated since the Russians screwed up the IL-76 deal. The Russians have to fix that issue first before they can bring China to the negotiating table again.

Regardless, the real prize is the PLAAF contracts, which are many times larger than any other export contracts that only buys four to 24 planes. There is no way for the Russians ever to regain those and finance their PAK-FA. Their best compromise is to allow Russian components to participate in the J-11B, at least get some sales of components like engines. If the Russians ever threaten an embargo, you can be sure that any potential business with the Chinese even in the long term future is over and the Russians still don't want that.

[tphuang]

Aren't the chinese claiming to have developed the HQ-17 based on the S-300?

oh brother, you bought into that rumour? There is no evidence that China has tried to reverse engineer S-300

You said it's worse the PESA or AESA. The MKI carries PESA.

PESA is not automatically better than slotted array radar. The one J-11B certainly has better tracking range. You can even compare Zhuk-MSE to Bars originally, MSE clearly has the longer tracking range.

So the contract was for 200 Su-27SK to be license built in China. If China produces more then 200 Su-27SK/J-11B would that not violate the contract? You yourself mentioned high need for the planes.

Well, it certainly is not violating anything right now. We will see what happens when 200 mark hits. I suspect by that time J-11 series would have evolved so much that it would be hard to judge the violation part. Again, without seeing the original contract, this is hard to say for sure.

Here's an interesting article I found about the subject matter.

Outside View: China's obsolete fighters

by Ilya Kramnik
Moscow (UPI) May 2, 2008
Earlier this year reports appeared in the media that China had copied Russia's Sukhoi Su-27 Flanker fighter and that its J-11 version, now manufactured in China, would be sold to third countries, undermining Russia's positions on the global arms market.

Ilya lost all credibility after I read this part
'Chengdu J-10 -- an essentially Israeli warplane featuring Russian avionics."


Haven't read anything that explains the possible options facing the Russians in this J11B saga. So I'd just highlight some of these.

(i) Pulling the plug on maintenance

Everyone here knows how much work and spares are required for the maintenance of any aircraft. If Russia holds back spares and maintenance support to china, that could potentially cripple the existing Su-27/J-11 + J-10 fleet which has a relatively higher % component relying on the Russians.

Notwithstanding the above, ship and submarine support operations eg radars, fire control, torpedoes etc for Kilos, Sovremennys and the Luzhous etc could be affected.

Sure, China could possibly develop makeshift support (as did Iran when US held back F14 support), but this will take time. China's exposure to Russian tech has permeated down to several levels.

Actually, China gets most of its spares and maintenance from Ukraine and Belarus. Besides, it already have the capability to manufacture the entire su-27, why would it have problem maintaining one. As for Kilos, we've seen the major shipyards repairing kilos, so they have the capability to do so. I'm not sure about Sovs, but they can certainly replace shtil on 052B with HH-16 if really needed. But they imported enough shtil to last for a while. They can replace the top plate on 052B/Sov with the home born Sea Eagle.


(ii) No more new deals

There goes the Su-33 deal...

They never really wanted su-33, that's why they have the domestic naval flanker program going. As I mentioned on my blog, the first one is in final assembly right now.

(iii) No more export sales

Sales to Pakistan of the FC-1 will not go through. Other aircraft sales that is dependent on Russian engines will not go through.

WS-13 just finished with the long duration test in 2007, should be certified by late 2009. All they need is one more shipment of RD-93, and JF-17 would not be affected at all. Much of J-10s this year will be using WS-10A, so that's not going to be an issue either. I suppose the only one that could be troubling is D-30KP2 with H-6K, but that's really not that important of a program. The large bypass engine program is also apparently progressing well.

(iv) No more new foreign technology

This is potentially the biggest negative. Russia will withhold any new technology. How much other nation will present China with is a question mark.

They haven't got any new foreign technology from the Russians this past year if you haven't noticed. It's the Chinese that's delaying military cooperation, not the Russians (due to Il-76 deal).

In view of (i) to (iv) above, it is my view that China will still come to an arrangement with Russia especially when J11Bs aren't going to be that significant to jeopardise the relationship.

China will not let the Russians take advantage of it the way India did.

More significantly, what does Russia hope to accomplish? I can guess that they would want information on what the chinese have done to the Suks, possibly some kind of monitoring on the numbers but the more sensitive info like radars will probably still be out-of bounds.

My guess is that the Chinese will eventually compromise on a license arrangement that will enable Russia to keep track of the numbers but the license is unlikely to be of the same level as the original J-11 assembly.

Overall, I don't think the Russians are that naive to expect that the chinese would not be able to copy their tech. Its also not like they have shown all their tech cards over to the chinese either. Its still posturing to reap the max benefits.

China will probably eventually pay Russian some royalties (if they haven't done so) to ensure unlimited non-export production. But, it will do this for political rather than military reasons.

[weasel1962]

Deleted

[crobato]

As far as I understand, Russia has not stopped the delivery of engines. The Russians don't operate as a monolithic entity---just because Sukhoi is cash starved, does not mean that MiG/Klimov and Salyut has to suffer with it. FYI, as this is going on, Russia just recently delivered the last batch of S-300PMU2s under an existing contract.

Furthermore, both the Ukraine and Belarus does have the ability to maintain and even overhaul the engines, and indeed, parts such as the blades can be manufactured in China with the technical help of the Ukrainians and Belarussians.

The four earlier Kilos were all refitted inside China. Not just maintained, completely refitted---a completely different level---the first sub going in in 2005 and the last one this year. There is photographic evidence of the refitting, which can be spotted in Shanghai. There is no report that China ordered "parts" for the Kilos.

The bottom line is that Russia wants the big cash which means the Chinese business---mainly the PLAAF contracts---but it is not willing to jeopardize other contracts and future potential contracts for this. The Russians are walking a very thin line here; they obviously want some financial compensation if not another major arms contract.

[Feanor]

FYI, as this is going on, Russia just recently delivered the last batch of S-300PMU2s under an existing contract.

No. The S-300PMU2's will be delivered this summer.
http://www.upiasiaonline.com/Security/2008/05/02/china_to_receive_lastest_sams_from_russia/3682/


And I wonder how is Pakistan going to maintain the FC-1/RD-93 engines without Russian support.

The same way everyone else does: Ukraine. There was recently a huge scandal at the aircraft engines expo in Russia where a Russian company accused the Ukranian repair plants of conducting repairs without the licenses for it.


oh brother, you bought into that rumour? There is no evidence that China has tried to reverse engineer S-300

It was a question. I've heard rumors about it, but have not seen anything definitive, so I figured I'd ask. Another question (note: question not claim :) ) what about the HQ-7 and tech. transfers from the French Crotale? SinoDefense claims it was based on the Crotale.

Ilya lost all credibility after I read this part
'Chengdu J-10 -- an essentially Israeli warplane featuring Russian avionics."


To be honest I cringed when I read that, but the problem is that the article was written for a casual audience, and sometimes dumbing down the facts is the only way to get your point across. What do you think of his actual thesis/conclusion? The Su-27SK is an awfully old fighter. And it's independent Chinese production has just begun. Seems like the Chinese MiG-21 story. It was a decent fighter plane when China first got it, but here it is in service almost half a century later.

Actually, China gets most of its spares and maintenance from Ukraine and Belarus. Besides, it already have the capability to manufacture the entire su-27, why would it have problem maintaining one. As for Kilos, we've seen the major shipyards repairing kilos, so they have the capability to do so. I'm not sure about Sovs, but they can certainly replace shtil on 052B with HH-16 if really needed. But they imported enough shtil to last for a while. They can replace the top plate on 052B/Sov with the home born Sea Eagle.

So indigenization of Russian/Soviet technology with Chinese mods?

Existing Su-27s and J-11s run on the AL-31 engines. I don't think Ukraine and Belarus produces the AL-31 engines. As far as I understand, Russia has completely stopped deliveries of engines.

Duplicating engine spares is not as easy as it sounds. If not, it will mean re-engining close to 400-500 aircraft. Well, that can be done. Whether it is worth doing is another issue.

It could be done gradually, as the engines get to the end of their service life they would be replaced by the Chinese alternative.

China will not let the Russians take advantage of it the way India did.

It is slightly off topic, my apologies, but I have to disagree with you there. India actually has gotten some pretty good deals, especially in terms of technical documentation. Unless you're referencing the Gorshkov deal, I don't see where you're coming from.

[weasel1962]

Deleted

[qwerty223]

Existing Su-27s and J-11s run on the AL-31 engines. I don't think Ukraine and Belarus produces the AL-31 engines. As far as I understand, Russia has completely stopped deliveries of engines.

Duplicating engine spares is not as easy as it sounds. If not, it will mean re-engining close to 400-500 aircraft. Well, that can be done. Whether it is worth doing is another issue.

Having the entire cream of the air force crop lying in the hangers for the next few years whilst china cranks out the engines will be a military issue. China is not going to turn out 1,000 engines overnight. They're going to have serious serviceability issues.

Repairing or servicing ships or subs is one thing. Getting the right spare parts is another.

Whether China is taking this seriously and talking to the Russians right now? It doesn't take a genius to guess...



And I wonder how is Pakistan going to maintain the FC-1/RD-93 engines without Russian support.
Some logic I find it hard to understand. When the Chinese are proud of their J-11B, it contrast the above "China gets most of its spares and maintenance from Ukraine and Belarus", it just dont make sense. Why they need to bring in parts from a 3rd party? Not to mention there is an established framework by the existing contract, the Chinese are having a production line within the country!

[Ozzy Blizzard]

PESA is not automatically better than slotted array radar. The one J-11B certainly has better tracking range. You can even compare Zhuk-MSE to Bars originally, MSE clearly has the longer tracking range.

Usually at comperable power output, they are in terms of detection and track radii. But thats only a small part of assesing a radars capability, ECCM, scan rates, muti target track and engagement and performance in high clutter environments are significantly better in PESA's over MSA's. AESA's are a whole other kettle of fish....

[Feanor]

Well, my understanding is based on the below.
http://www1.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Europe/Sukhoi_piracy_Russia_threatens_to_sue_China/articleshow/2973405.cms

btw, I make no comments on the accuracy of the article.

The article implies that Russia has stopped delivery of engines for the J-11, or so it seems to me.

[crobato]

Well, my understanding is based on the below.
http://www1.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Europe/Sukhoi_piracy_Russia_threatens_to_sue_China/articleshow/2973405.cms

btw, I make no comments on the accuracy of the article.

Same newspaper has been ragging that the Russians won't sell the RD-93 to the JF-17 for Pakistan. And they were shown wrong.

[weasel1962]

Deleted

[crobato]

And I gather, the Russians are not going to hurt one sector for the sake of another. Why would MiG-Klimov be forced to halt deliveries and lost their business for the sake of Sukhoi? Or Salyut? Or Almaz? The size of these deliveries make up the lifeblood of these companies and for Salyut, the size of the Chinese engine contract outweighs by far any other other contract they have. This is now Russia in capitalism, it does not act monolithic. Every company is backed by their own faction of politicians and generals. The Russians are making way too much money from their pipelines to China, and this far outweigh the Sukhoi issue. Don't waste a thousand dollars to make a ten dollar point.

[Feanor]

Don't waste a thousand dollars to make a ten dollar point.

Unless it's a matter of principle.

[PrOeLiTeZ]

After decades of experience and production the AL-31 series are still facing issues, its operation life is WAY below Western counterparts. AL-31 isn't exactly the Golden Prize either. Russia military export on the RISE?????? Strange people say this cause India is really unhappy with TVC AL-31 equipped with its MKI force cause of its extremely short operation life.

All equipments are influenced by one another Cold War was a clear example US copies some of Soviet designs and Soviet copies some of US designs.

[PrOeLiTeZ]

Responding to one persons post of China not having this and that:

Attack Helo: Z-9W, Z-10 [pure attack heli not like the Z-9W)
AWACS: KJ-2000, KJ-200, Y-8 Roto
Transport: Y-8, Z-9
AAM:PL-12, PL-8
Aerial Refuelling: Converted H-6 bomber
Bomber: JH-7A

Yes so what does Russia have that cannot already China's domestic industry cannot provide then???

I spy some Sinodefence members here :)

[Gollevainen]

People here are forgetting one major thing...

The reason why china is presistenly trying to reduce its dependency on foreign export products is plain simple: If you want to be a superpower you need to have self-reliance in weapon manufacturing as far as possible.

Wheter some system is marginally superior based on purely off-the-context performancedata is completely irrelevant. China has been in difficoult position as there have been huge generational gap between it and rest of the worlds major military powers. In order to close this cap as fast as possiple china has done the vicest possiple move: buy as much it can from as large spectrum that is possiple of foreing modern military technology. Some nationalist think this is a bad thing and tries to even deny it, but there is no shame in it, its the only option that China had.

Now we have started to see indications of the next equally logical phase: Introducing its own set of equipment which are par or near the level of sophistication as the other players have. 90% of those are based on the systems which China has aquired from foreing sources, mainly from Russia. This again reasonable as there is not much other choises if you wish to keep up the phase of the others. The next leap forward from this is the phase where we really start seeing completely indegenious and authentical ideas.

But if we go to the issue of "what Russians still has to offer" the awnser is, like many have said: not much. It would be in longterm strategical point of view harmfull to both. Chinese have already basicly adopted most of the basic stuff that there is.
This doesen't mean that China has surpassed Russia in the overall level of sophistication in military hardware. There are cases where some individual chinese system might be better in purely performance point of view which is only natural as the Russian derelight state has effiectly ment huge stagnation in the development of all technology. Still funnily enough most of the top-of-the-notch russian military hardware is still generation ahead of what chinese have at the moment and all those russian stuff, the development had started in the Soviet days. It speaks hard language...If we go to individual systems, the russian stuff that I personally would like to see in chinese inventory (and which obviously is way ahead in russia) is the complete army and airdefence forces air-defence suite and systems, Su-34, Il-76 level transport plane in production in china and last but defintely not at least the organic divisional and regimental level artillery. Chinese artillery is desperetly outdated and altough there are the new PLZ05 SP gun being introduced, it hardly sufficient enough to replace all the artillery pieces inside the PLA divisions and regiments. Alot speaks the fact that the acient D30 is just recently started to introduce to the chinese inventory....most of the chinese regimental level artillery is WWII era in its sophistication.

[Feanor]

Yes so what does Russia have that cannot already China's domestic industry cannot provide then???

Modern versions of all of the above :rolleyes:

[qwerty223]

Responding to one persons post of China not having this and that:

Attack Helo: Z-9W, Z-10 [pure attack heli not like the Z-9W)
AWACS: KJ-2000, KJ-200, Y-8 Roto
Transport: Y-8, Z-9
AAM:PL-12, PL-8
Aerial Refuelling: Converted H-6 bomber
Bomber: JH-7A

Yes so what does Russia have that cannot already China's domestic industry cannot provide then???

I spy some Sinodefence members here :)
Well,
Z-10/9 whos engine are they using?
PL-12 whos sensors and tech are the base of it?
H6 does it looks quite familiar?
KJ-2000 or whatsoever, whos platform are they using?
JH-7 it is still at the stage before it reaches the standard production model . After "in service" for a decade.

[crobato]

Modern versions of all of the above :rolleyes:

Modern what? The Russians don't have modern ships, with the exception of a single overpriced frigate versus the Luyangs, Houbeis and Jiangkais being put in place. China certainly don't need subs from them either, considering its only the Lada that's up to the Yuan's level, and the Lada hasn't passed its trials, while the Yuan is in a full series production now. Nuclear subs might be interesting but they're never for sale anyway and China already got their own programs going. They already got their modern helicopter, the WZ-10, and modern tanks, the ZTZ-96G and ZTZ-99G and G1. The only thing I can think of buying Russian are transport helicopters and planes, neither of which are really very modern too, just that the Chinese may already be too spread out developing everything so they left gaps. The Chinese artillery is outdated but the answer to that is build more PLZ-05 and PLZ-45 not buy Russian, which is going to be a contradiction to the PLA logistical system. Su-34? The old H-6 has three times the fuel capacity and has way more space to put equipment. By making the H-6 even more efficient, you will get far better payload, range and loiter.

[crobato]

Well,
Z-10/9 whos engine are they using?
PL-12 whos sensors and tech are the base of it?
H6 does it looks quite familiar?
KJ-2000 or whatsoever, whos platform are they using?
JH-7 it is still at the stage before it reaches the standard production model . After "in service" for a decade.

The WZ-10 is using an engine that's copied off from Pratt and Whitney, not from the Russians.

The PL-12 is not depending on Russian sensors and techs. The Chinese have developed an AAM ARH seeker since the 90s in the form of the AMR-1, and that was before they ever saw a single R-77.

The H-6 was something they got from the Russians back in the early fifties. Please note that the design actually works well, and China has actually refused any other Russian marketing attempts to sell Tu-22s.

The KJ-2000 uses used IL-76s as platforms, but really, its the radar that counts not the platform. You don't need to buy that from the Russians either. The most important thing is that China isn't buying A-50s, whose phase array version has yet to be deployed, while there are already two flights of KJ-2000s.

The JH-7A is already in service and mass production since 2003, and there are already five regiments of the plane.

[weasel1962]

Deleted

[crobato]

The PLAAF is getting their IL-76s from the CAU airline, which has served as a civilian front for the PLAAF anyway, e.g. using civil Tupolevs as spy planes. There is plenty of used IL-76s from small airlines serving the central Asian routes. If you remember, one IL-76 crashed in the runaway overloaded with cheap Chinese goods a few years ago.

As for the JH-7s and JH-7As, you are correct. The two regiments of JH-7 with the 6th are avionically the same as the JH-7A however, the second regiment being built with the JH-7A's electronics right at the start and the first regiment having upgraded.

[Feanor]

Modern what? The Russians don't have modern ships, with the exception of a single overpriced frigate versus the Luyangs, Houbeis and Jiangkais being put in place. China certainly don't need subs from them either, considering its only the Lada that's up to the Yuan's level, and the Lada hasn't passed its trials, while the Yuan is in a full series production now. Nuclear subs might be interesting but they're never for sale anyway and China already got their own programs going. They already got their modern helicopter, the WZ-10, and modern tanks, the ZTZ-96G and ZTZ-99G and G1. The only thing I can think of buying Russian are transport helicopters and planes, neither of which are really very modern too, just that the Chinese may already be too spread out developing everything so they left gaps. The Chinese artillery is outdated but the answer to that is build more PLZ-05 and PLZ-45 not buy Russian, which is going to be a contradiction to the PLA logistical system. Su-34? The old H-6 has three times the fuel capacity and has way more space to put equipment. By making the H-6 even more efficient, you will get far better payload, range and loiter.

But unlike the H-6 itself a Tu-16 derivative, the Su-34 is a tactical bomber. Horribly outdated, the H-6 not a tactical bomber in the first place. It's modern Russian analogue would be the Tu-160 or Tu-22M5. The Su-34 carries far superior avionics, including TERCOM capabilities. It also has A2A capacity, meaning effectively self-escort. The H-6 also doesn't have inflight refuel, which the Fullback does. Internal fuel storage is higher, but payload is identical at 8000 kg for both. Given availability of external fuel tanks and in-flight refuel, and essentially a different mission profile, that seems to not be a major disadvantage (if a disadvantage at all). Finally a comprehensive ECM suite and tail-mounted radar all offer it distinct advantages over the H-6. Interestingly enough the Su-34 even offers significant progress in crew comfort (a traditional weak spot for Russian equipment). Your comparison there is laughable.

Chinese production of the new ZTZ-99 has been progressing very slowly (certainly slower then Indian purchase of the T-90S). As far as I know only around 200 are in service right now. Artillery production has also been very slow. Is it lack of funds? Or lack of facilities? If it's lack of facilities purchases of Russian equipment could at least temporarily serve as a substitute. Finally you've completely ignored SAM's which are a major part of modern warfare. Russia is so far ahead of Chinese SAM design that purchasing Russian theater level SAMs (unlikely anyone else is willing to sell) is practically the only way of acquiring modern AD-network for China. Remember China still has SA-2 in service.

I'm not experienced enough with ships to comment there.

[qwerty223]

The WZ-10 is using an engine that's copied off from Pratt and Whitney, not from the Russians.

The PL-12 is not depending on Russian sensors and techs. The Chinese have developed an AAM ARH seeker since the 90s in the form of the AMR-1, and that was before they ever saw a single R-77.

The H-6 was something they got from the Russians back in the early fifties. Please note that the design actually works well, and China has actually refused any other Russian marketing attempts to sell Tu-22s.

The KJ-2000 uses used IL-76s as platforms, but really, its the radar that counts not the platform. You don't need to buy that from the Russians either. The most important thing is that China isn't buying A-50s, whose phase array version has yet to be deployed, while there are already two flights of KJ-2000s.

The JH-7A is already in service and mass production since 2003, and there are already five regiments of the plane.
JH-7A the platform itself had a mass production, not its FCS suite.

Why no Tu-22m? because gameplay changed.

We all know where is the source for PL-12 seeker.

As of the KJ2000 & WZ10, my point is that they need an engine source. The Russian can offer all the tech it needs since they can provide a full scale of Heli engines. The matter lies on whether the Chinese want assistance from the Russian. All the critical components of these complex need to be out sourced, certainly the Russian will have a chance. Although the Russian might no been able to offer the best of the world, but at least it is better than none for the Chinese. After all, the Russian talks about money and less humanity.

[PrOeLiTeZ]

JH-7A the platform itself had a mass production, not its FCS suite.

Why no Tu-22m? because gameplay changed.

We all know where is the source for PL-12 seeker.

As of the KJ2000 & WZ10, my point is that they need an engine source. The Russian can offer all the tech it needs since they can provide a full scale of Heli engines. The matter lies on whether the Chinese want assistance from the Russian. All the critical components of these complex need to be out sourced, certainly the Russian will have a chance. Although the Russian might no been able to offer the best of the world, but at least it is better than none for the Chinese. After all, the Russian talks about money and less humanity.
Z-10/Z-9 are not equipped with Russian engines, their are equipped Canadian Pratt and Whitney derivatives. More than adequately required.

PL-12 not based of Russian technology either, its more in the lines of AMRAAM.

No new bomber needed, H-6 is fuel efficient, pretty good range and payload for its consideration of weight and cheap unit cost.

JH-7A has been in serice for a very long time. So dunno what you are even talking about 70+ units are in operational status in serving both in PLANAF and PLAAF. The JH-7A is currently the standard and prefered marintime attack fighter bomber. As well as A2G.

KJ-2000 its the electronics that really matter, even if Russia didn't supply anymore IL-76 China can just place them on Y-8 as seen with the KJ-200.

Transport heli China has got good ties with their European partners who are quite capable and experience in producing top notch heli for all purposes.

Russia had its chances to reap lots of beneficial money from China during the 90's but they didn't. Even India is starting to walk away from Russian military equipment right now. While China exporting military hardware is on the rise. In Naval, and Aviation also.

WS-10A power their J-10/11 fleet
WS-13 power their JF-17 fleet

[crobato]

The JH-7A is in mass production. Its FCS is not Russian but from Leihua Institute.

As for the PL-12, the seeker is also from Leihua---who designed the AMR-1 seeker and the seekers for the YJ series----and not from AGAT as many claim.

As for the WZ-10, the question is already moot since China already picked the PW engines for the prototypes, and the next stage will be copying those engines.

As for the KJ-2000, China does indeed have an outstanding order for D-30A engines, which brings a lot of money for the Russians.

After all, that's what the Russians really wanted, right? More orders. More money. The new Russian President just said he wants closer ties to China, and a visit is planned soon. I suggest leave the politicians be. They will work something out eventually.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2008-05/08/content_6668795.htm

[crobato]

But unlike the H-6 itself a Tu-16 derivative, the Su-34 is a tactical bomber. Horribly outdated, the H-6 not a tactical bomber in the first place. It's modern Russian analogue would be the Tu-160 or Tu-22M5. The Su-34 carries far superior avionics, including TERCOM capabilities. It also has A2A capacity, meaning effectively self-escort. The H-6 also doesn't have inflight refuel, which the Fullback does. Internal fuel storage is higher, but payload is identical at 8000 kg for both. Given availability of external fuel tanks and in-flight refuel, and essentially a different mission profile, that seems to not be a major disadvantage (if a disadvantage at all). Finally a comprehensive ECM suite and tail-mounted radar all offer it distinct advantages over the H-6. Interestingly enough the Su-34 even offers significant progress in crew comfort (a traditional weak spot for Russian equipment). Your comparison there is laughable.


You have no idea that the updated H-6s share nothing with the Tu-16 but the airframes. Everything in the electronic sense are generations ahead, including digital cockpits. The upgraded H-6K does not necessarily have inferior avionics than the Su-34. Updated avionics are an issue separate from the platform. For instance, the H-6K, which has a solid nose, can put a radar far larger than you can have over the Su-34. Furthermore, the aircraft being larger, can hold much more in terms of electrical generation and electronic equipment. How can the Su-34 be better in terms of ECM when practically much of the Soviet/Russian research on this issue became underfunded after the Cold War, where as Chinese counterintelligence efforts began to rise afterwards. Since the 90s, the Chinese have been much more diligent with espionage and data collection efforts, since the crux of any ECM is to know the signals you need to spoof at.

Crew comfort please? The H-6 can hold a small crew rather than just two persons, and there is more room to move about. As for TERCOM, the JH-7A already has that.

The Su-34 is based on an outdated concept, mainly low level penetrating interdictors, a concept that died in the nineties. We're now back to flying high, away from low level interdictors, to high level cruise missile and stand off munition launchers. You want to be as high as possible to get the maximum range for your cruise missiles like the DH-10, KD-63 or YJ-62, or winged munitions like the LS-6.

The Tu-16 itself ia sound design, like the B-52 or even the Tu-95---the latter plane is something the PLAAF indeed should have, which I would honestly much prefer over the Su-34. These big planes have much greater loitering capabilities. They could stay up longer, cruise longer. With their big wings, they can cruise at higher altitudes more economically, and has less aerodynamic consequences carrying large cruise missiles than a fighter based platform.

As a matter of fact, a modified H-6 is the platform used to launch China's air launched recoverable space vehicular project.


Chinese production of the new ZTZ-99 has been progressing very slowly (certainly slower then Indian purchase of the T-90S). As far as I know only around 200 are in service right now.

We got news from the CDF that 220 more tanks were built in the last year or so. The reason is that the PLA wasn't completely satisfied with the ZTZ-99 but seems much more encouraging so with the ZTZ-99G. Another thing is that China is also mass producing a cheaper more cost effective substitute, the ZTZ-96 and now 96G, of which at least 1500 to 2000 may have been built already. They won't put that many eggs in those models since another tank model (99G1 or 99A) might be introduced soon.

The other reason is funds. The Army itself has become less important, and the crux of the modernization has shifted to the Air Force and the Navy, which is now considered the front line of defense.

The lack of funds only means they would buy Russian even less. Considering of all the branches, the Army itself bought the least Russian material compared to the Air Force and Navy, and that was already in its most obsolete period. In fact, you can say in two words what the Army only bought---Mi-171 helos and Tor-M1s. Today, the Russian material costs a lot more thanks to Russia's double digit inflation.



Artillery production has also been very slow. Is it lack of funds? Or lack of facilities? If it's lack of facilities purchases of Russian equipment could at least temporarily serve as a substitute. Finally you've completely ignored SAM's which are a major part of modern warfare. Russia is so far ahead of Chinese SAM design that purchasing Russian theater level SAMs (unlikely anyone else is willing to sell) is practically the only way of acquiring modern AD-network for China. Remember China still has SA-2 in service.

The Chinese did not purchase a lot of Russian theatre SAMs. As a matter of fact, the Chinese have begun to deploy the HQ-9 in land bases. Remember, the naval version of such is already with two of the PLAN's destroyers, and that system has a full four faced 360 degree coverage which the RIF-M does not have. The PLAN is no procuring any more RIF-M. Given that the last of the S-300PMU2s are going to be delivered soon, there has not been talks of renewed and follow up orders.

China has stopped procuring the Tor-M1 some time ago, and has not even order the Buks. The PLA still relies on updated versions of the HQ-7 and recently the KS-1A which is supported by a phase array. As for the SA-2s, those electronics have been changed as well.

[Feanor]

You have no idea that the updated H-6s share nothing with the Tu-16 but the airframes. Everything in the electronic sense are generations ahead, including digital cockpits. The upgraded H-6K does not necessarily have inferior avionics than the Su-34. Updated avionics are an issue separate from the platform. For instance, the H-6K, which has a solid nose, can put a radar far larger than you can have over the Su-34. Furthermore, the aircraft being larger, can hold much more in terms of electrical generation and electronic equipment. How can the Su-34 be better in terms of ECM when practically much of the Soviet/Russian research on this issue became underfunded after the Cold War, where as Chinese counterintelligence efforts began to rise afterwards. Since the 90s, the Chinese have been much more diligent with espionage and data collection efforts, since the crux of any ECM is to know the signals you need to spoof at.

Alright, point taken. None the less you're still ignoring that they're two different platforms, meant for two different types of missions.

Crew comfort please? The H-6 can hold a small crew rather than just two persons, and there is more room to move about. As for TERCOM, the JH-7A already has that.


Your claim of superiority was in regard to the H-6 not the JH-7.

The Su-34 is based on an outdated concept, mainly low level penetrating interdictors, a concept that died in the nineties. We're now back to flying high, away from low level interdictors, to high level cruise missile and stand off munition launchers. You want to be as high as possible to get the maximum range for your cruise missiles like the DH-10, KD-63 or YJ-62, or winged munitions like the LS-6.

I would imagine, it's a valuable asset in SEAD or even tactical strike (though some redundancy with the Su-25).

The Tu-16 itself ia sound design, like the B-52 or even the Tu-95---the latter plane is something the PLAAF indeed should have, which I would honestly much prefer over the Su-34. These big planes have much greater loitering capabilities. They could stay up longer, cruise longer. With their big wings, they can cruise at higher altitudes more economically, and has less aerodynamic consequences carrying large cruise missiles than a fighter based platform.

Again different mission profiles.

The Chinese did not purchase a lot of Russian theatre SAMs. As a matter of fact, the Chinese have begun to deploy the HQ-9 in land bases. Remember, the naval version of such is already with two of the PLAN's destroyers, and that system has a full four faced 360 degree coverage which the RIF-M does not have. The PLAN is no procuring any more RIF-M. Given that the last of the S-300PMU2s are going to be delivered soon, there has not been talks of renewed and follow up orders.

The HQ-9 has been procured in limited numbres, and is also somewhat deficient in range. Only 100km. While superior to baseline S-300 systems, the newer variants are all superior in range. Not to mention that the s-300 is a yesteryear system. The S-400 has already entered serial production.

We got news from the CDF that 220 more tanks were built in the last year or so. The reason is that the PLA wasn't completely satisfied with the ZTZ-99 but seems much more encouraging so with the ZTZ-99G. Another thing is that China is also mass producing a cheaper more cost effective substitute, the ZTZ-96 and now 96G, of which at least 1500 to 2000 may have been built already. They won't put that many eggs in those models since another tank model (99G1 or 99A) might be introduced soon.

Source please. I'm not doubting your words, just interested in where you got the info.


China has stopped procuring the Tor-M1 some time ago, and has not even order the Buks. The PLA still relies on updated versions of the HQ-7 and recently the KS-1A which is supported by a phase array. As for the SA-2s, those electronics have been changed as well.

You can modernize something to no end, but it will still be inferior to newer systems.

In any event my point seems to stand (despite certain valid arguments on your part) China does have things to gain from trade with Russia.

[tphuang]

I think people are forgetting that IL-76 is by far the biggest deal that the Russians are holding against China. If China is willing to hold out on something that critical (it goes far more than just transport), do you really think it won't hold out on maintenance?

Existing Su-27s and J-11s run on the AL-31 engines. I don't think Ukraine and Belarus produces the AL-31 engines. As far as I understand, Russia has completely stopped deliveries of engines.

you should read about the deal Shenyang Liming signed with Salyut then.

Duplicating engine spares is not as easy as it sounds. If not, it will mean re-engining close to 400-500 aircraft. Well, that can be done. Whether it is worth doing is another issue.

they have less than 300 flankers from Russia and about 50 of them are ready to put into reserves anyways.

Having the entire cream of the air force crop lying in the hangers for the next few years whilst china cranks out the engines will be a military issue. China is not going to turn out 1,000 engines overnight. They're going to have serious serviceability issues.

cream of crop? J-10 is the cream of PLAAF. They are only looking for 180 engines from the Russians according to that last deal they signed for AL-31s and got a bunch of it. You are really overstating a small problem.

Repairing or servicing ships or subs is one thing. Getting the right spare parts is another.

As Crobato said, complete refitting. They put their own stuff on the kilos. They have the technology to do this.

Whether China is taking this seriously and talking to the Russians right now? It doesn't take a genius to guess...

They are talking to Russians due to political reasons (maintaining friendship) rather than technical reasons.

And I wonder how is Pakistan going to maintain the FC-1/RD-93 engines without Russian support.
Ukraine. China lacks the capability to produce RD-93, but it has the license and capability to certainly maintain it. Besides, WS-13 was designed for FC-1 right from the start.


So indigenization of Russian/Soviet technology with Chinese mods?

The part about Sea Eagle being indigenization of Russian tech is fallacy. Same with HH-16. I would grant the FCRs, but that's only because we don't have more information on it. If you look at the stuff they are testing on 891 recently, you'd know how outlandish the claims are.


It is slightly off topic, my apologies, but I have to disagree with you there. India actually has gotten some pretty good deals, especially in terms of technical documentation. Unless you're referencing the Gorshkov deal, I don't see where you're coming from.

i'm referring to the price hikes on T-90, su-30, the problems with Club and IL-38 upgrade and the delays in Talwar. Interesting enough, the last deal for 100 AL-31FN was actually carried out at losses for Salyut.


Usually at comperable power output, they are in terms of detection and track radii. But thats only a small part of assesing a radars capability, ECCM, scan rates, muti target track and engagement and performance in high clutter environments are significantly better in PESA's over MSA's. AESA's are a whole other kettle of fish....

you do realize Bars is a combination of PESA and MSA, right?
As for multi-target engagements, do you really think J-11B will ever be using that against stealth and stealthy targets that it will undoubtedly face?
PLAAF is actually following USAF path of skipping PESA going straight to AESA.


Z-10/9 whos engine are they using?
PL-12 whos sensors and tech are the base of it?
H6 does it looks quite familiar?

Z-10 is using WZ-9 for mass production run. The original PWC engines were broght in purely for prototype while WZ-9 was being developed.
PL-12 using Russian tech has zero basis.
H-6K right now is completely different from the original Tu-16. According to the reports, 70% of the airframe was modified from an earlier H-6 variant. It also has entirely new avionics, weapons system + ejection seating.

JH-7A the platform itself had a mass production, not its FCS suite.

Why no Tu-22m? because gameplay changed.

We all know where is the source for PL-12 seeker.

As of the KJ2000 & WZ10, my point is that they need an engine source. The Russian can offer all the tech it needs since they can provide a full scale of Heli engines. The matter lies on whether the Chinese want assistance from the Russian. All the critical components of these complex need to be out sourced, certainly the Russian will have a chance. Although the Russian might no been able to offer the best of the world, but at least it is better than none for the Chinese. After all, the Russian talks about money and less humanity.

You gotta be kidding. JH-7A FCS not in mass production?
tu-22M? they are not interested in old units.
We all know about source of PL-12 seeker, but you clearly don't.
You have no point with regard to Z-10, it uses WZ-9 by 608 Institute. It's completely different from KJ-2000.

[qwerty223]

I think people are forgetting that IL-76 is by far the biggest deal that the Russians are holding against China. If China is willing to hold out on something that critical (it goes far more than just transport), do you really think it won't hold out on maintenance?


you should read about the deal Shenyang Liming signed with Salyut then.

they have less than 300 flankers from Russia and about 50 of them are ready to put into reserves anyways.

cream of crop? J-10 is the cream of PLAAF. They are only looking for 180 engines from the Russians according to that last deal they signed for AL-31s and got a bunch of it. You are really overstating a small problem.

As Crobato said, complete refitting. They put their own stuff on the kilos. They have the technology to do this.

They are talking to Russians due to political reasons (maintaining friendship) rather than technical reasons.

Ukraine. China lacks the capability to produce RD-93, but it has the license and capability to certainly maintain it. Besides, WS-13 was designed for FC-1 right from the start.


The part about Sea Eagle being indigenization of Russian tech is fallacy. Same with HH-16. I would grant the FCRs, but that's only because we don't have more information on it. If you look at the stuff they are testing on 891 recently, you'd know how outlandish the claims are.


i'm referring to the price hikes on T-90, su-30, the problems with Club and IL-38 upgrade and the delays in Talwar. Interesting enough, the last deal for 100 AL-31FN was actually carried out at losses for Salyut.


you do realize Bars is a combination of PESA and MSA, right?
As for multi-target engagements, do you really think J-11B will ever be using that against stealth and stealthy targets that it will undoubtedly face?
PLAAF is actually following USAF path of skipping PESA going straight to AESA.


Z-10 is using WZ-9 for mass production run. The original PWC engines were broght in purely for prototype while WZ-9 was being developed.
PL-12 using Russian tech has zero basis.
H-6K right now is completely different from the original Tu-16. According to the reports, 70% of the airframe was modified from an earlier H-6 variant. It also has entirely new avionics, weapons system + ejection seating.

You gotta be kidding. JH-7A FCS not in mass production?
tu-22M? they are not interested in old units.
We all know about source of PL-12 seeker, but you clearly don't.
You have no point with regard to Z-10, it uses WZ-9 by 608 Institute. It's completely different from KJ-2000.
Lol... U are a joke. Show me fact? But anyways, all you can show are those from sinodefence, the big summarize of internet rumors.

[crobato]

Alright, point taken. None the less you're still ignoring that they're two different platforms, meant for two different types of missions.

Your claim of superiority was in regard to the H-6 not the JH-7.


The fact remains that the Su-34 as a concept has gone out of the door with the F-111. China isn't looking for a low level interdictor, its looking for a cruise missile delivery truck.

I never spoke about the JH-7 in the first place.


I would imagine, it's a valuable asset in SEAD or even tactical strike (though some redundancy with the Su-25).


Its overkill for SEAD when cheaper and faster planes can do it, like the Su-30MKK, which can go faster than the Su-34 which can only go up to Mach 1.7 or 1.8. Furthermore, cheaper planes can also do SEAD.



Again different mission profiles.


And again, a mission profile that China no longer needs.


The HQ-9 has been procured in limited numbres, and is also somewhat deficient in range. Only 100km. While superior to baseline S-300 systems, the newer variants are all superior in range. Not to mention that the s-300 is a yesteryear system. The S-400 has already entered serial production.


Its the S-300 that China procured S-300 in limited numbers, and the reason for that is the HQ-9. The PLA never did believe that Russian equipment ever work to spec anyway, so quoting missile ranges don't mean anything. The PLA never did quote their real ranges anyway. At one point, they put 160km in an poster for the C-803, and a year later, the US tracked a YJ-83/C-803 missile flight test launched off from a JH-7 that traveled up to 255km.


Source please. I'm not doubting your words, just interested in where you got the info.


I got this from the CDF, where members pour through PLA documentation and reports, as well as CCTV video clips. I got this specifically from kcandrew who knows a lot more about PLA Army orbat better than you and I.


You can modernize something to no end, but it will still be inferior to newer systems.

It does not matter so long its cost effect and provides the needed bang for the buck.


In any event my point seems to stand (despite certain valid arguments on your part) China does have things to gain from trade with Russia.

Which is what? Certainly not in any terms military, other than jet engines. You're talking about ores, oil and gas right?

[crobato]

Lol... U are a joke. Show me fact? But anyways, all you can show are those from sinodefence, the big summarize of internet rumors.

We got these from pictures of JH-7s and JH-7As in various airfields, identifying their location via the airfield background, comments and notes with the picture, and most of all the unit number painted in the aircraft. Plus some GE imagery. We do this not only in the SDF, but the CDF as well where one of the forums members who love to pour over this stuff is a retired US air force analyst, who thanks to him allowed us to decode PLAAF unit numbers.

[Feanor]

The fact remains that the Su-34 as a concept has gone out of the door with the F-111. China isn't looking for a low level interdictor, its looking for a cruise missile delivery truck.

So once again we simply differ in opinion here. Keep in mind that the USAF has simply started kitting out fighters for A2G roles to make up the lack of tac-strike.

I never spoke about the JH-7 in the first place.

As for TERCOM, the JH-7A already has that.

Come on :rolleyes:

Its overkill for SEAD when cheaper and faster planes can do it, like the Su-30MKK, which can go faster than the Su-34 which can only go up to Mach 1.7 or 1.8. Furthermore, cheaper planes can also do SEAD.

Again it's main mission profile is tactical strike, or CAS. Also keep in mind the Su-30 doesn't have TERCOM and isn't specifically kitted out for the mission. You're using a multi-purpose fighter jet, when more specialized platforms are available. Finally given a sophisticated AD network with strategic RLS networking large numbers of theater and tac-SAMs, as well as SPAAGs and interceptors I would not call the Fullback overkill.

And again, a mission profile that China no longer needs.

That's your opinion; yes?

Its the S-300 that China procured S-300 in limited numbers, and the reason for that is the HQ-9. The PLA never did believe that Russian equipment ever work to spec anyway, so quoting missile ranges don't mean anything. The PLA never did quote their real ranges anyway. At one point, they put 160km in an poster for the C-803, and a year later, the US tracked a YJ-83/C-803 missile flight test launched off from a JH-7 that traveled up to 255km.

So what is the practical range of the HQ-9?

I got this from the CDF, where members pour through PLA documentation and reports, as well as CCTV video clips. I got this specifically from kcandrew who knows a lot more about PLA Army orbat better than you and I.

I don't suppose you'd be able to give me access to the sources directly, rather then quoting someone on another forum. No disrespect meant, but I'm interested in where people find their information (so that I may possibly find some there too :) ).

It does not matter so long its cost effect and provides the needed bang for the buck.

If China ever ends up in a major conflict we'll get to see. Otherwise it's all theory bash.

Which is what? Certainly not in any terms military, other than jet engines. You're talking about ores, oil and gas right?

Resources are a big part of it, but so is technology. Russia is well into a 5th gen. aircraft program, where as the Chinese are still at the 3rd gen. with the bulk of their airforce.

[tphuang]

Lol... U are a joke. Show me fact? But anyways, all you can show are those from sinodefence, the big summarize of internet rumors.
Alright, from my past conversations with you, it's clear you don't know much. So, just to point out certain things that I was responding to you about.

On JH-7A, we have 6 confirmed regiments through pictures of them in different part of China + their serial numbers in those pictures + GE photos + news about JH-7A operating in different regiments.
Tu-22M, we know they didn't get it and what more do I need to say?
PL-12 seeker, we have active radar seeker developed by Leihua for SD-10. What more do I need to show?
WZ-9 by 608, this has been published in multiple AVIC1 articles.

I don't rely on Sinodefence.

[crobato]

So once again we simply differ in opinion here. Keep in mind that the USAF has simply started kitting out fighters for A2G roles to make up the lack of tac-strike.


LOL. You want to get Su-34s to do the job of Q-5s? You need to match the resources to the job.


Come on :rolleyes:


And the JH-7 has that for quite some time now. What's so hard about an autopilot or flight control system responding to Doppler ground mapping? You think TERCOM is some sort of Martian technology just because it has capitalized acronyms?


Again it's main mission profile is tactical strike, or CAS. Also keep in mind the Su-30 doesn't have TERCOM and isn't specifically kitted out for the mission. You're using a multi-purpose fighter jet, when more specialized platforms are available. Finally given a sophisticated AD network with strategic RLS networking large numbers of theater and tac-SAMs, as well as SPAAGs and interceptors I would not call the Fullback overkill.


And keep in mind that is not what the PLAAF wants. For the cost per bang, the JH-7As can do it better. Not the superior platform but more affordable in numbers. Plus the fact the JH-7A has been extensively tested and integrated with various weapons, pods and ECM equipment. Its a maturing system; the Su-34 is still trying to find buyers.

The JH-7A like the modern H-6s are capable of launching long ranged stand off missiles, like the KD-88s and KD-63s respectively. What's better, to risk the plane or the cruise missile against sophisticated AD defenses? Which cruise missile is already integrated on the Su-34 now?


That's your opinion; yes?


And its your opinion that you think the PLAAF has to be tied down to an F-111/Su-24 strike concept when every other country is moving away from them.


So what is the practical range of the HQ-9?


That would be classified then.


I don't suppose you'd be able to give me access to the sources directly, rather then quoting someone on another forum. No disrespect meant, but I'm interested in where people find their information (so that I may possibly find some there too :) ).

I am quoting from someone who actually reads and researches Chinese material. Its not hard to find Chinese military magazines in the streets of any major Chinese city, flip through the CCTV network, or browse through more than a dozen massive military topic forums in the Chinese mainland or official PLA or government sites.

In the first place, any number you are getting like the 200 you heard previously was from the CDF in the first place, estimated by people I mentioned. So you want to accept the figure they estimated in 2006 but not the one they made in 2008, huh?


If China ever ends up in a major conflict we'll get to see. Otherwise it's all theory bash.

Theory? WWII is basically won by weapons that offer the most bang per the buck.


Resources are a big part of it, but so is technology. Russia is well into a 5th gen. aircraft program, where as the Chinese are still at the 3rd gen. with the bulk of their airforce.

Russia is still looking for funding with their 5th gen program, which is exactly what Sukhoi were depending on their China orders. Despite that, KnAAPO filed suit in order to get the money from those orders to upgrade their plants instead. The Chinese have been funding and working on their fifth gen project for years now. When you compare their air force to Russia's, you will find that far more of their aircraft are at least equipped with the more modern slotted array planar---a standard in Western air forces these days---that are capable of launching active guided BVRAAM. Even J-8IIs are getting upgraded to these, while the Su-27SM upgrades in the RuAF are basically adding modern electronics to an even older generation twist cassegrain design.

[Feanor]

LOL. You want to get Su-34s to do the job of Q-5s? You need to match the resources to the job.

And the JH-7 has that for quite some time now. What's so hard about an autopilot or flight control system responding to Doppler ground mapping? You think TERCOM is some sort of Martian technology just because it has capitalized acronyms?

Your claim was that the H-6 in PLAAF service is superior to the Su-34 being accepted into service right now. Then you pulled the JH-7 out. Which is when I said that your claim of superiority was with the H-6. To which you replied accusing me of glorifying the TERCOM capabilities of the Fullback. Sooo..... now do we have that point clear?

And keep in mind that is not what the PLAAF wants. For the cost per bang, the JH-7As can do it better. Not the superior platform but more affordable in numbers. Plus the fact the JH-7A has been extensively tested and integrated with various weapons, pods and ECM equipment. Its a maturing system; the Su-34 is still trying to find buyers.

It has one buyer so far. The VVS. Time will show if any others emerge.

The JH-7A like the modern H-6s are capable of launching long ranged stand off missiles, like the KD-88s and KD-63s respectively. What's better, to risk the plane or the cruise missile against sophisticated AD defenses? Which cruise missile is already integrated on the Su-34 now?

So you suggest being able to overwhelm the AD network with cruise missiles?

And its your opinion that you think the PLAAF has to be tied down to an F-111/Su-24 strike concept when every other country is moving away from them.

I think that having the tac-strike capability is a good idea, yes. I'm not saying that it should prevent other areas from developing.

That would be classified then.

So.... no reliable info? Do you happen to know the range of the Crotale?

I am quoting from someone who actually reads and researches Chinese material. Its not hard to find Chinese military magazines in the streets of any major Chinese city, flip through the CCTV network, or browse through more than a dozen massive military topic forums in the Chinese mainland or official PLA or government sites.

In the first place, any number you are getting like the 200 you heard previously was from the CDF in the first place, estimated by people I mentioned. So you want to accept the figure they estimated in 2006 but not the one they made in 2008, huh?

Again read what I wrote. You're getting offended at something that wasn't there. I was interested in seeing the original material because I almost always am. Not because I didn't believe you.

Theory? WWII is basically won by weapons that offer the most bang per the buck.

Yes. So if you think China needs to prepare to fight another WWII then I guess you're right. I think future conflicts will look very different.

Russia is still looking for funding with their 5th gen program, which is exactly what Sukhoi were depending on their China orders. Despite that, KnAAPO filed suit in order to get the money from those orders to upgrade their plants instead. The Chinese have been funding and working on their fifth gen project for years now. When you compare their air force to Russia's, you will find that far more of their aircraft are at least equipped with the more modern slotted array planar---a standard in Western air forces these days---that are capable of launching active guided BVRAAM. Even J-8IIs are getting upgraded to these, while the Su-27SM upgrades in the RuAF are basically adding modern electronics to an even older generation twist cassegrain design.

I absolutely agree with you that the state of the Russian airforce is atrocious. However funding for the PAK-FA seems to be doing fine for the time being. Two prototypes are in production right now. Flight testing of some of the engines and avionics is being done on the Su-35BM. I'm very hopeful that MDB will release the breakdown of the Russian defense budget for 2008 so we can see for ourselves what exactly happens.

[weasel1962]

Deleted