Seriously? J-10 project started at height of Sino-Soviet stand off and is designed specifically to counter Soviet 3rd-Gen fighter like Su-27. It's comical to imagine that Russians would offer asistance in developing a fighter to counter their own.
China's transport, tanker & heavy lift aircraft
- Thread starter Totoro
- Start date
Seriously? J-10 project started at height of Sino-Soviet stand off and is designed specifically to counter Soviet 3rd-Gen fighter like Su-27. It's comical to imagine that Russians would offer asistance in developing a fighter to counter their own.
MiG-29
Banned Idiot
why not? if they were designing in 1990 MiG-1.44 and Su-27 was already old in 1990, in fact in 1997 when China flew J-10 Russia started test flights of S-37 and taxi of MiG-1.44 and tested Su-37 and Su-35.
Any way J-10 is powered by AL-31s which was much less capable than the Al-41 that MiG-1.44 was fitted in 1995.
MiG-29
Banned Idiot
i agree, but could we stop the Russia trashing too?
Russian aid in chinese projects are just cooperation among nations, ways to get projects on time and at the end ways humanity starts knowing more each other.
Y-20 has Russian engines nothing bad about that, like Russians use Chinese made stuff, it is just commerce
MwRYum
Major
Wake up, this is no longer the 1950s where ideology still counts for something. It's all business now. "Friendship" and "humanity" has no place in the world of capitalism...
Personally I never give a damn of what "foreign input" or "advice" XAC got in making Y-20, because it's still up to the Chinese to finish that last mile, ie. finish the design and put it all together. Using D-20 engines is out of necessity because their domestic engine is still years away, meanwhile D-20 engines imports is still ongoing, shares stock with the current Il-76 in PLAAF fleet. So strive to have a workable product first, then when the domestic engine project bears fruit, re-engine the Y-20 for it and roll it out as the next BLOCK. Practical move.
In terms of foreign reliance China is still better than what India has to grit their teeth even now, and in the foreseeable future.
MiG-29
Banned Idiot
Y-20 is a good aircraft, however the only point i am arguing, is why people can not see aircraft as the product of technological needs and economic needs, i have never said comunist ideas are behind Russia and China cooperation.
No i said China cooperates with Russia because is mutually benefitial for both nations.
Russia provides the engines, China is the program leader, Antonov gives some advice, there is nothing wrong in that.
Most aircraft and jet engines these days are the product not of a single company.
If you can see how many companies are working on an aircraft program you will know that basicly most aircraft are global products.
People say China will power the Y-20 with a domestic engine, okay that is fine, however have you ever thought that even jet engine these days has become a global product.
Germany and Italy can build jet engines by their own, Japan too, however they have cooperated in jet engines for Airbus aircraft or Boeing, Antonov is capable of designing a An-78 and Ukraine build engines like D-18T for An-124 or An-225.
I ask you why Nations cooperate? Ukraine if it wants can build with Russia An-124, however the market has not jet justified the production of those aircraft to the degree, most aircraft build by Ukraine are regional jets like An-148.
Market is what really justifies an aircraft, without financial support any jet is dead.
China will cooperate and cooperates for the same reason Russia does, and it is to save money and make a profit, but that is the result of the fact aircraft are becoming very expensive, so expensive that Brazil before designing the C-309 is looking first for customers.
Y-20 is the same, it requieres China to cut R&D costs, doing it with Russian engines or Ukranian help is a way to make Y-20 more profitable.
Alliances these days are a result of economic and technological needs and that is part of globalization.
MwRYum
Major
You just need to look at China of pre-&-post 1989, and India of pre-&-post nuclear test, to get the conclusion. When comes to national defense, globalization doesn't work, unless relationships in whatever bloc you're in is solid. For developing "players" like China, that has the edge of a faster and cheaper route, but carries the risk of "getting grabbed at the nuts" by your suppliers, who could pull the plug on your big projects when you go against "their scheme of things".
Also, if you aren't capable to produce a domestic replacement, your bargain power in whatever globalization deal will be the least favorable...the kind of situation seen in 90's Russia is unique, where the one with superior know-how have to kow-tou to those who brings the direly-needed hard currencies to do shopping.
And let's not forget China is facing an embargo on high-tech military and dual-use technologies, of which the odds of te West lifting is about as good as "when Hell freezes over", thus however time-consuming and expensive it is, China has to develop those capabilities, and able to produce those things 100% domestically. That's the necessity and reality China faces.
Engineer
Major
The problem with PAKFA is its engine inlets are straight, exposing the engine fans that are the biggest sources of radar reflection on any aircraft. Even when we discount that and only analyzes the exterior shaping, as was , J-20 still has better stealth shaping than PAKFA.
Last edited:
Engineer
Major
None of the articles has anything to do with the stealth shaping on PAKFA to which you replied to. But back to the Y-20...
You are incorrectly assuming China, Russia and Ukraine come together to work on the Y-20 like European nations do with Airbus. Russian engines are merely temporary solution here to speed up the development process, not a permanent solution. Antonov provided initial inputs that may or may not used by China on the Y-20. The three countries are not working toward a common set of objectives. What's more, all three countries are trying to benefit themselves, not trying to benefit one another.
You are misrepresenting companies as countries. An aircraft requiring contributions from multiple companies does not mean it requires contributions from multiple nations. As an example, the F-22 is designed by Lockheed but uses an engine made by Pratt and Whittle. Both companies are American. Multinational cooperation is not a prerequisite for aircraft development.
You are also misrepresenting commercial aircraft as military aircraft. Airbus and Boeing produce aircraft for international customers who have their own requirements as well as political considerations. Naturally, that requires providing choices, including engines from a customer's own country. The same cannot be said for military aircraft such as the Y-20, J-20 and J-10 that are really meant for one customer.
The very fact that China spends money in developing domestic engines shows China is not trying to save money. Likewise, instead of investing money into IL-478 to save development costs, China spent its own money on designing a completely new transport that is the Y-20. Not only is China not trying to cut its R&D costs, China shows a trend of raising them. Your argument about costs and profits does not apply to China.
China's objective is to be completely independent in aerospace sector, not trying to be beneficial to Russian and Ukraine. Ukraine wants to use its Soviet technologies to exchange as much money as possible before those technologies become outdated. Out of the three countries, the only country that wants to cut R&D costs is Russia because the country still has financial trouble.
MiG-29
Banned Idiot
I disagree because in globalization suppliers mean also customers, when France buys Tiger Helicopter is buying german but also french, same is England with Eurofighter, it is buying italian, german and spanish products buy also british.
Airbus also reflects that philosophy since the begining, it was an pan European product.
C-309 is a brazilian lead project that has suppliers from Argentina, Chile, Colombia, whom will also buy C-309 for their respective air forces.
If China builds Y-20 only for her air force the price is all paid by China alone, it limits its exportability.
To give you a simple exmaple. Y-20 has limited Chances of being exported in the CIS simple because Russia will want to export Il-476, Europe is out of the question, since they have A-400M, North america too out of the question, India? out of the question too since they have MTA and they probably will buy Il-476 just by alliance with Russia or A-400Ms with alliance with France.
South america too is out of the question since Brazil already has market there for the C-309 and most south american air forces do not have needs beyond C-309.
Japan? out of the question.
So when you end up you find it hs exportability only to very few nations in Africa or Asia.
In few words, globalization means you make alliances so your products are bought by your friends or allies.