Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Chinese Stealth Copy Of F-22/F-35?  
User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10480 posts, RR: 14
Posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 21216 times:

Just saw this photo of the Chinese J-31 on the Airliners.net homepage and wondered if the Chinese were copying the F-22 and/or the F-35 (or both):




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mutha


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Aldo Bidini
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Nicholas Peterman




"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
112 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinetommytoyz From Tonga, joined Jan 2007, 1353 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 21200 times:

I am certain China stole a lot of engineering data, enough to give them the confidence to try and design their own stealthy fighter. Besides the coatings to absorb signals, the shape is pretty much dictated by simple math and radar signal behavior. You want to shape the exterior so that the signals emitted from the radar do not bounce back where they originated from.

If the Chinese can give the plane the ability to produce very high kinetic energy, akin to the F-22, it'll be a real threat, even if it's not as stealthy. The reason is that even a MACH 4 missile with a target lock has a hard time getting to a plane with the amount of energy the F-22 has.

The fact they are making it a twin engine, speaks to a higher, rather than lower kinetic energy potential. Everyone basically can see what makes the F-22 a success and will try to emulate it or even improve on it, as best they can. That's only natural. The F-22 will not be top dog forever.


User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10480 posts, RR: 14
Reply 2, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 21177 times:

I remember hearing a story of during the Korean War, where a USAF B-29 was forced down in China and the Chinese copied it, but the engineering was off and it didn't fly very well.


"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlinePowerslide From Canada, joined Oct 2010, 569 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 21157 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 2):
I remember hearing a story of during the Korean War, where a USAF B-29 was forced down in China and the Chinese copied it, but the engineering was off and it didn't fly very well.

That is because the Chinese need to start producing their own tech rather than try to copy others. They will never reach the level of sophistication that the US has without trial and error ON THEIR OWN.


User currently offlinecjg225 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 844 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 21138 times:

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 3):
That is because the Chinese need to start producing their own tech rather than try to copy others. They will never reach the level of sophistication that the US has without trial and error ON THEIR OWN.

Hopefully you're right. I somewhat doubt that, though. This is the 2010s, not the 1950s. I'm sure technology has significantly increased the ability to copy other things.



Restoring Penn State's transportation heritage...
User currently offlinesovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2614 posts, RR: 17
Reply 5, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 21074 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting tommytoyz (Reply 1):
The fact they are making it a twin engine, speaks to a higher, rather than lower kinetic energy potential.

This is because the J-31 is a light fighter with a purpose similar to the F-35 but the Chinese engine technology can't produce an engine as powerful as the F-35's. So they put two. The Chinese have been having trouble with engines for a long time.

Quoting mayor (Reply 2):
I remember hearing a story of during the Korean War, where a USAF B-29 was forced down in China and the Chinese copied it, but the engineering was off and it didn't fly very well.

You may be thinking of World War 2 where it landed in Russia and was eventually made into the Tu-4. Which was slightly inferior in performance due to the English to metric conversion of all parts which made it slightly heavier.


User currently offlinegeekydude From China, joined Apr 2004, 401 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 21062 times:

Quoting mayor (Reply 2):
I remember hearing a story of during the Korean War, where a USAF B-29 was forced down in China and the Chinese copied it, but the engineering was off and it didn't fly very well.

Never heard of it. Was it not Russia that made their Tupolev-4 based on the B29?



FLIB 152 'heavy' low approach...Caution wake turbulance!
User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1732 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 21059 times:

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 5):
This is because the J-31 is a light fighter with a purpose similar to the F-35 but the Chinese engine technology can't produce an engine as powerful as the F-35's. So they put two. The Chinese have been having trouble with engines for a long time.

The Chinese are struggling to even license produce some of the engines that they have access to, such as the RR Spey. The Chinese haven't gotten the metallurgy down right, which is often half the battle with engine design and production. The story I am hearing is there is a lot of QC problems with the engines they are manufacturing, which is affecting production rates as engines have to be scrapped or rebuilt before they leave the factory.


User currently offlineOroka From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 913 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 21030 times:

If you remove the requirement for the F-35 to have its engine farther forward than normal to accommodate the lift fan in the F-35B, it would look very much like the J-31. The vert stabs look like the YF-22s.


In defense of the Chinese 'copying', in their culture, there is no such thing as 'intellectual property'. You came up with a good idea, you were first to market with it, that is it. Dont look at it as stealing designs so much as finding alternate sources designs. It is still an inferior jet... but they have made a leap ahead in tech.


User currently onlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7443 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 20788 times:

Quoting Oroka (Reply 8):
It is still an inferior jet... but they have made a leap ahead in tech.

How do you know that, it may well be better than the F-35.


User currently offlinesprout5199 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1853 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 20756 times:

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 5):
You may be thinking of World War 2 where it landed in Russia and was eventually made into the Tu-4. Which was slightly inferior in performance due to the English to metric conversion of all parts which made it slightly heavier.
Quoting geekydude (Reply 6):
Never heard of it. Was it not Russia that made their Tupolev-4 based on the B29?

I have read that when the Soviets copyed the B-29 that the rudder pedals said "BOEING" as the order was to copy it, and nobody wanted to disobey Stalin's order.

Dan in Jupiter


User currently offlinetommytoyz From Tonga, joined Jan 2007, 1353 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 20641 times:

The J-20 and J-31 may mean there is a competition or evaluation going on....

User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10480 posts, RR: 14
Reply 12, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 20539 times:

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 9):
How do you know that, it may well be better than the F-35.

It may not be inferior, but it seems it's designed more for a role like the F-22, not the F-35.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1732 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 20546 times:

Quoting Oroka (Reply 8):
If you remove the requirement for the F-35 to have its engine farther forward than normal to accommodate the lift fan in the F-35B, it would look very much like the J-31. The vert stabs look like the YF-22s.

Disagree. The main issue for the Chinese was a lack of a suitable engine for their fighters (hence the use of Russian engines and a twin-engine design otherwise they would have gone for a powerful single). You want to bury the engines deeper and further back in the fuselage as it will reduce the frontal radar signature. You can better hide the front of the engine as the engine blades are often a major source of radar reflection.


User currently offlinebilgerat From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 220 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 20497 times:

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 3):
That is because the Chinese need to start producing their own tech rather than try to copy others. They will never reach the level of sophistication that the US has without trial and error ON THEIR OWN.

And of course the Americans got absolutely nothing from Peenemunde, Werner Von Braun, Frank Whittle, the Miles M.52 etc etc.


User currently onlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10480 posts, RR: 14
Reply 15, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 20479 times:

Quoting bilgerat (Reply 14):
And of course the Americans got absolutely nothing from Peenemunde, Werner Von Braun, Frank Whittle, the Miles M.52 etc etc.

You think there was NO trial and error, even after all of that? Alot of good men died, trying to prove many designs, LONG after the U.S. (and others) was using this technology.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlinebilgerat From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 220 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 20472 times:

Yes of course there was trial and error. However, it's quite disingenuous to criticise the Chinese for using other countries' ideas and technology when the US itself benefitted hugely from doing just this.

User currently offlinePowerslide From Canada, joined Oct 2010, 569 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 20404 times:

Quoting bilgerat (Reply 16):
Yes of course there was trial and error. However, it's quite disingenuous to criticise the Chinese for using other countries' ideas and technology when the US itself benefitted hugely from doing just this.

Who did the US copy for the F-22...F-35?


User currently offlinedkswim From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 30 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 20376 times:

I remember reading that the B-29 that went to russia had a couple patches from damage (odd bullet holes) and the tu-4 had them copied as well

User currently offlinedkswim From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 30 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 20369 times:

A lot of the technology we gained durring WWII from the UK like radar, jet engines to name a few was an agreement between UK and USA. UK traded info for meterial, american mass production, and allies.

USA has copied german design on a couple items over the years. U-Boats, V-1, V-2.


User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13220 posts, RR: 77
Reply 20, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 20260 times:

Quoting sprout5199 (Reply 10):
I have read that when the Soviets copyed the B-29 that the rudder pedals said "BOEING" as the order was to copy it, and nobody wanted to disobey Stalin's order.
Quoting dkswim (Reply 18):
I remember reading that the B-29 that went to russia had a couple patches from damage (odd bullet holes) and the tu-4 had them copied as well

I heard that too, might well be true given that his henchman Beria (hobbies included abducting, raping, sometimes murdering young women), was supervising the effort.
He did the same for the Soviet atomic bomb project, holding the scientists families hostage as an 'incentive' get the job done ASAP.
(Small wonder that when Stalin died, Beria did not as he had thought, succeed him, rather he was bundled off to prison and quietly executed some weeks or months later).

It is a fair point about others not being entirely clean of using others technology, in the case of the US on jet engines and aspects of designs for pioneering supersonic design, as well as UK contributions to the Manhattan Project, it was more a case of agreements on sharing of it, or technology exchanging, being unilaterally broken by the US after WW2 ended.
Which is not the same as what China is suspected of doing.

It's far from clear however if China has had to do this, or succeeded at all, for this aircraft.
(We do know that China did benefit from US military technology in the late 1980's/early 1990's.However that was supplied via Israel. Something probably that many lawmakers in Washington don't want to, or choose not to, hear about).


User currently offlinebilgerat From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 220 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 20220 times:

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 17):
Who did the US copy for the F-22...F-35?

Please don't try and use a silly strawman argument here.

Earlier in this thread you stated:

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 3):
That is because the Chinese need to start producing their own tech rather than try to copy others. They will never reach the level of sophistication that the US has without trial and error ON THEIR OWN.

Which as I explained was quite disingenuous given the US has benefitted hugely from technology gained from other countries.

Or perhaps Frank Whittle travelling to General Electric with several examples of his engine in 1942 didn't kick start American jet engine development. Perhaps the Americans, British and Soviets gained nothing from the research conducted by the Germans in Peenemunde's supersonic wind tunnels. Perhaps the Americans could have put a man in orbit and got to the moon totally on their own without all those German scientists and the V-2.

Do I need to continue?

As I said, it is most disingenuous to criticise the Chinese for using technology gained from other countries when *everyone* - the US included, has always been doing it. Unless of course you want to believe that American aerospace technology got where it is today totally on its own merit and work without any innovation, input or discoveries from elsewhere?


User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14030 posts, RR: 62
Reply 22, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 20199 times:

Quoting GDB (Reply 20):
(Small wonder that when Stalin died, Beria did not as he had thought, succeed him, rather he was bundled off to prison and quietly executed some weeks or months later).

Actually Beria´s execution was not so silent:

Quote:
Beria and all the other defendants were sentenced to death. When the death sentence was passed, according to Moskalenko's later account,[citation needed] Beria pleaded on his knees for mercy[31] before collapsing to the floor and wailing and crying energetically, but to no avail: the other six defendants were executed by firing squad on 23 December 1953, the same day as the trial,[32] while Beria was fatally shot through the forehead by General Batitsky after the latter stuffed a rag into Beria's mouth to silence his bawling. The body of Lavrentiy Pavlovich Beria was subsequently cremated and buried around Moscow's forest.

(from Wikipedia) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beria
He died as a coward.

Jan


User currently offlineHaveBlue From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 2112 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 20146 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 22):
(from Wikipedia) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beria
He died as a coward.

That was an amazing, if not appalling, read. The guy was a nightmare.


On topic... while the US has obviously benefited from foriegn technology, most notably from England and Germany during and after the war respectively, i don't believe we've actually 'stolen' technology often if at all, and definitely not on the levels that the USSR and China has. The Tu-4 is an amazing example and an interesting story for anyone who hasn't read it yet.



Here Here for Severe Clear!
User currently offlinesovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2614 posts, RR: 17
Reply 24, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 20108 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Most cases it is hard to say what was copied by any country whether it is USA, USSR or China. Yes the Tu-4 was an outright copy and nobody has denied that. But just because a Tu-154 and a B-727 have a similar configuration does not mean one is a copy of the other. In that case why does nobody ever say the British copied the B-727 with the Trident? The bottom line is that in those days "copying" and "stealing" was arguably much harder. You needed spies, informants, etc... now it is all possible digitally through hacking. Is the J-31 a copy of the F-22? Most certainly not. But the nose does have a striking resemblance. I think if China did in fact manage to steal information then no doubt it has been incorporated or at least used in some way. But nobody in China will admit to this.

25 747classic : I hope for the Chinese that they didn't copy the not up to spec aerodynamics (and numerous other problems) of the F35.
26 mayor : There's a bit of a difference between duplicating the Mona Lisa or just using the same artistic techniques to paint something different. Did the P-59
27 bilgerat : Because the Trident was developed before the 727. Once again, I never said the Americans "copied" or "duplicated" anything. I'm saying Powerslide's e
28 GDB : Funny you should mention that, though the Trident was the earlier design. in the development stage, a Boeing team was invited over view a mock up of
29 bilgerat : The Trident is a very interesting aircraft, not least because of the conjecture that had DH (amalgamated into HS during the Trident's development) bee
30 MD11Engineer : There was a similar story about the French Caravelle and the DC-9. Originally Douglas engineers went over to France to see the Caravelle to possibly
31 Post contains images cjg225 : If they're going to copy it, they might as well copy its mistakes, too... especially since they may not know what's a mistake and what's not.
32 Post contains images sovietjet : GDB - interesting story! Fair enough, my mistake. My argument still stands though except just reverse the types i.e. nobody says Boeing copied the Tri
33 cargotanker : I think there is a tremendous and obvious difference from receiving technology 60+ years ago vs engaging in espionage/theft today. Yes the US gained
34 bilgerat : *Sigh* So many people can't see past the little flag next to their username....
35 GDB : You can copy/steal/reverse engineer all you like, they will get a better aircraft than they might have done otherwise. What they won't get is a prope
36 ThePointblank : 1. The lift fan is connected to the engine via a driveshaft. How far forward the engine doesn't really matter as much. I will note that the Boeing X-
37 bilgerat : Don't forget the F/A-18 was optimised for carrier ops and carries around a far amount of dead weight for a land based aircraft. Hypothetical question
38 GDB : Don't know if the F-18L would have done better against the F-16 (and Mirage 2000) in international competitions to pick a new combat aircraft but I t
39 bilgerat : I'm not so sure... compared to the F/A-18A the F-18L was considerably lighter, could carry a greater payload, and was 9G capable... all the while reta
40 mayor : Don't forget that the basic F-18 design was the LOSER in the lightweight fighter design competition that the F-16 won.
41 j.mo : I thought I read somewhere the F-16 choice was more political, as General Dynamics had a big ol' factory in Texas with nothing to make. The F-111 pro
42 GDB : Well, the YF-17! However, I do recall some air arms picked the Hornet in close competitions with the F-16, where the deciding factors were twin engin
43 mayor : I think you'll agree that the F-18 is probably a more capable a/c than it's "ancestor", the YF-17 as well as slightly larger. Today, it might beat th
44 ThePointblank : What really killed the Northrop F-18L was that it was first pitched to Canada, we were unwilling to bet the house on an aircraft that wasn't built ye
45 neutrino : Why is a thread about the J-20/J-31/F-22/F-35 morphing into discussions on the Fighting Falcon vs the Hornet? Go back on the right contrails, please.
46 Revelation : Germaine to this conversation, you may want to mention that the UK contributed Klaus Fuchs to the Manhattan Project, who then contributed high level
47 Oroka : I will have to do some searching as to where I read it, but the F-35 engine is farther forward to accommodate the F-35B lift fan. Yes, there is a dri
48 rampart : But some have said that (read previously in the thread, not just us A.net kooks), and Boeing probably did. Early studies of the 727 looked nothing li
49 Post contains links and images alberchico : Not to get off topic but the J-20 has apparently begun weapons integration testing... http://china-defense.blogspot.com/20...-day-j-20-mounting-pair-o
50 tommytoyz : Just by the size of the J-20 and it's 2 large engines, it seems to me to be aimed at the F-22 and as a long range interceptor in general. I wouldn't b
51 kanban : Isn't it amazing that Russia and China roll out new planes, fly them within weeks, and have them doing weapons integration testing within months, all
52 Powerslide : Also the Chinese don't really care about their pilots when they crash in a fiery death. When the Chinese and Russians reach the level of sophsticatio
53 sovietjet : Your ignorance is just at amazing levels. China is arguable since for all we know they're flying J-20 and J-31 shells just for show to scare us, but
54 wingman : Have to agree with that last point. The Chinese may be unproven in modern warfare, but Russia has shown what it's capable of against a much more sophi
55 Powerslide : ..still waiting for it.....
56 sovietjet : China has the talent and money but not the experience. They are playing a very fast catch-up game. Maybe the J-20 and J-31 will be slightly inferior
57 GDB : Maybe some lessons, or warnings, from the past. When the Mig-25 Foxbat appeared in prototype form, it sent a chill of fear through NATO. The sheer pe
58 sovietjet : GDB raises some valid points. Yes, the USSR has had its fair share of inadequate designs (although I would consider planes like the Tu-22 (not Tu-22M)
59 Post contains links tommytoyz : That's interesting history. The Russians did develop some very effective aspects in their fighters that were later adopted everywhere - IRST and off b
60 GDB : Sovietjet, quite so, really my post was about Western overrating of Russian and Chinese designs, rather than the aircraft themselves. With the later M
61 Post contains links GDB : While Russia is not the USSR (thankfully), Mr Putin has been busy rolling back the openness for his country, China of course is open compared to say
62 tommytoyz : T-50 began 2003, combat capable 2017 - 14 years total. (they say 2015) F-35 began 1996 (JSF begin), Combat capable, 2019 - 23 years total (current es
63 GDB : I'd not put money on that. A senior Russian politician cast doubt whether they've got the capacity to produce them except at a very low rate. (Which
64 tommytoyz : Same with the F-35. IMHO, bound to be delayed further if the past performance on this aircraft is any indication. 2020 at the earliest I'd say. I agr
65 tommytoyz : I agree with you on that 100%. The US is the one going broke on Defense spending now. The T-50 is reported to have cost Russia and India a total of $
66 ThePointblank : For what is admittedly a much less capable aircraft. And they haven't even finished development of the actual engine that will power it, so that deve
67 GDB : Which version and what do we mean by in service? Because no modern combat aircraft comes with all the capabilities 'out of the box' these days. F-22
68 Post contains links yyzala : They had Buk-M, Tor, Osa and even SPYDER. That is quite sophisticated and not defenseless as you would describe. When you have 70s era planes with no
69 GDB : it does look like that I grant you. But surely the difference is in that nature of the political system - the US has the capacity to change, alter po
70 tommytoyz : I agree to an extent. What is making that issue 10x more complex, is that the software that is delivered is ridden with errors and some versions only
71 Powerslide : Having more than one engine doesn't make it more advanced...
72 ThePointblank : Because F-35 is programmed using C and C++ and F-22 uses Ada... In addition, the F-35's avionics software has over 5 times the software code compared
73 GDB : That's true, the UK will presumably want to integrate Brimstone missiles, they should be OK for internal carriage. Worth remembering though, that at
74 ThePointblank : Indeed. Moving to the UAI weapons interface will simplify weapons integration testing for everyone, driving down partner costs for weapons integratio
75 autothrust : From the pictures it seems the J-31 having to big canards. The radar return must be huge unless they apply extensive RAM coatings.(if they do have som
76 tommytoyz : Agreed on that. My take on the J-31 is that it is still fairly stealthy, but the Chinese want it maneuverable at 65,000 feet at Mach 2 - or whatever
77 Post contains images neutrino : In contrast to most of your views, this statement I readily agree. (credit given where credit is due) A little correction though. Allow me to point o
78 Post contains links and images sovietjet : Where do you guys see canards on the J-31?? http://www.ubergizmo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/f31b.jpg I think you may be talking about the J-20
79 Post contains images tommytoyz : Righto, J-20 I was talking about with canards.... [Edited 2013-04-02 18:34:46]
80 tommytoyz : Good catch. I forgot about that. I think the Chinese are far further along in technology and engineering ability, than they are generally given credi
81 ThePointblank : Maneuverability is great, but it isn't the end all be all for air combat. It's its a straight up one verses one battle, pilot skill will determine th
82 autothrust : Maybe without russian metal but not without russian knowledge. I disagree on the J-20, EADS put much effort to design the canards of the Typhoon as s
83 neutrino : That's true and I (as do many others) am very much aware of it. The Shenzhou was designed and built by China with legally acquired Soyuz technology a
84 tommytoyz : Of course you have no way of knowing that. Even if true, nobody here can know to what extent. Even if the J-20 is only 70% of the F-22, it would stil
85 ThePointblank : Manufacturing consumer electronics and components =/ expertise in electronics. Someone has to design the circuitry and the software that runs the ele
86 Post contains images tommytoyz : It's clearly built for high speed. And the J-20 also has massive engines, like the others do. Not to say it won't be able to be a strike plane. But i
87 ThePointblank : With what engines? The best engines the Chinese have are the Russian AL-31's and their copies, and those engines don't have the power necessary to gi
88 Post contains links tommytoyz : I don't think the J-20 would be going so fast with development, if they didn't have an appropriate engine lined up in the end. Nor anything else. Tha
89 yyzala : Such as? Tommytoyz, what Chinese company has produced anything that made your jaw drop? What company can you equate to in China to the likes of Lockh
90 tommytoyz : Because they're fully operational already. The T-50s currently fly with them. It is being replaced by the Product 30 engine around 2015 with a stealt
91 Post contains links and images ThePointblank : The F-35 will be good enough. We've seen enough of what comes out from the Russians and by extension, the Chinese, in terms of their aircraft through
92 yyzala : That is the 117S. Only the T-50 and SU-35 and have it. Maybe in the 90s but no more. With 46.3 billion worth of weapons orders in '12, do you really
93 kanban : One thing I learned long ago is it is easy to belittle the opposition and maintain they are no threat only to have them pop up and beat the pants off
94 tommytoyz : The F-35A and B will not declare IOC before 2019. If you want to consider a handful of Marine F-35Bs with limited weapons and capability to be IOC at
95 Post contains links ThePointblank : The USMC disagrees with you on that. They said IOC in the 2014-2015 timeframe, and they aren't going to wait for IOT&E to finish. Col Kevin Kille
96 tommytoyz : oops. Meant F-35A and C. You should have noticed my booboo. I dd say USAF and NAVY birds/
97 Powerslide : The quality and level of sophistication they produce is crap. Plain and simple.
98 autothrust : Absolutly correct, radar return of engine blades is a big issue and can be analyzed by sophisticated radars and computer hardware to identify them. A
99 Post contains links kanban : So today we have http://finance.yahoo.com/news/meet-f-35-uss-200-144812833.html calling the F-35 a bench warmer . and you can of course authenticate t
100 tommytoyz : I remember when analysts were surprised to see the J-20 to begin with and then said it probably wouldn't fly. Don't forget the F-35 is also at least 6
101 sovietjet : Personally, this to me is the most surprising and confusing aspect of the T-50. I'm certain the Russian engineers know what S-ducts are and that bloc
102 Post contains images Acheron : It is a known fact the chinese are lacking when it comes to engines. They have had severe issues on making their CFM56 copy work, and yet it is still
103 Powerslide : Winslow Wheeler. Yahoo Finance. CNBC. I don't think so. Unless you can otherwise. This is the internet, you don't have to authenticate anything. Yes.
104 sovietjet : Not necessarily. True, there have been a lot of one-offs and projects that have gone nowhere but there are a few exceptions. The Su-30 is quite succe
105 kanban : Then why would Boeing have a big design and manufacturing engineering center there?.. that has been obvious in your posts for some time and has earne
106 Post contains images Powerslide : Oh noes, not the all too important RR rating.
107 autothrust : That's a derogatory and ignorant post, there are plenty of technologies or platforms which Russia is still top. Like the S-300W or S-400 Systems whic
108 india1 : Don't they say espionage is the world's 2nd oldest profession? So of course, every nation keeps a tab on other nations and there is a whole raft of il
109 tommytoyz : Not even to mention that NASA sends its astronauts to Russia and relies on the "crap" Russian technology to launch their astronauts into orbit and sa
110 SP90 : The US imported a lot of talent and designs from Germany and England after WW2. The moon landings were made possible because of Von Braun. The Soviets
111 solarflyer22 : 100% correct. I doubt this copy would have the performance of F-22 but its a huge leap for the Chinese. And although the F-22 might be better, it mig
112 vlad135 : His stupid? I bet life is tough for you indeed.[Edited 2013-04-17 02:26:57]
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Chinese Stealth Copy Of F-22/F-35?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Second Crash Of A V-22 In 3 Month posted Fri Jun 15 2012 05:04:50 by oldeuropean
Chinese Stealth Fighter Emerges... posted Mon Dec 27 2010 12:44:39 by alberchico
IR Footage Of F-22 At Farnborough posted Sun Jul 25 2010 10:34:23 by LimaNiner
Suitability Of V-22 Osprey For CG SAR Missions posted Thu Aug 13 2009 08:29:18 by BOACVC10
Cool Video Of The F 35 posted Fri Apr 25 2008 14:29:43 by Mortyman
Outstanding 360 View Of V-22 Pit In High Detail... posted Sun Jul 23 2006 07:50:37 by AirRyan
Sea Trials Of F-35 Aboard U.S.S. Wasp posted Mon Jan 21 2013 22:02:33 by Geezer
First Flight Of China's New Stealth Fighter J-31! posted Wed Oct 31 2012 13:37:08 by justinlee
F-35 On Exhibition In Front Of Oslo Town Hall posted Fri Aug 31 2012 15:43:25 by Mortyman
Talk Of F-35 Project Being Scrapped! posted Sat Apr 28 2012 19:03:19 by Zkpilot

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format