Chinese Engine Development
- Thread starter jackbh
- Start date
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Mig, of course. Notice that's the only common factor.
I would take General Zhu as an authoritative source as he is the grandson of a VERY famous general, Zhu De. However, his claim of China having a weak foundation in sophisticated machinery is something known to the world for a long time. Only a fool would claim China has the capability to manufacture the world's most advanced machinery in large quantities like Francis turbines and nuclear reactors. China is catching up, but it's still behind. The continued equipping of Chinese aircraft with Al-31's only proves that China is either experiencing substandard performance or is unable to keep up with aircraft production, a result of China's weak foundation in sophisticated machinery. General Zhu's point was not China is stagnating, but that China was behind and is still catching up, which does not contradict Chen Maozhang's claim that China's development was continuing well. In my opinion, I think both are presenting the truth, with one reporting on China's continued need to catch up and the other reporting on China's catching up process.
Just because he's the grandson of famous PLA general then his words is the golden truth? What if he's just a general with no strong family back ground?
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Just ask why does the West demand transparency from China especially in regards to the military? Because they think China is deceptively hiding capabilities and they want to know and be prepared to counter. They wouldn't all be worried if they thought China was less capable.
Hmm... I am starting to see a pattern here...
For some of the members, as soon as someone (irregardless of his/her background) say something negative or distinctively negative about China - eg. the Chinese still do not process sophisticated machinery and background, then they were all, "See. Even the Chinese admit that they are trailing behind! It must be true." or the Chinese aircraft have carnards... well... carnards must be bad. And when the Chinese are close to deploying stealth, then stealth must be back aerodynamically and conventional fighters with the help of ground radars and the such could easily kick the ass of these stealth fighters.
And whenever another person said something that distinctively or in their own imagination that contradict that believes, those same members will start questioning the credibility of the person, like, "ah, who should we believe?" and that the person who don't speak too positively of Chinese industry must be creditable because he don't sing praises of the product by his country.
However, that doesn't applied to other 'experts' (such as chief designer of some engine in Russia) that sing praises of the engines that were produced by the company that the chief designer are working in... .
Hmm... food for thought.
For some of the members, as soon as someone (irregardless of his/her background) say something negative or distinctively negative about China - eg. the Chinese still do not process sophisticated machinery and background, then they were all, "See. Even the Chinese admit that they are trailing behind! It must be true." or the Chinese aircraft have carnards... well... carnards must be bad. And when the Chinese are close to deploying stealth, then stealth must be back aerodynamically and conventional fighters with the help of ground radars and the such could easily kick the ass of these stealth fighters.
And whenever another person said something that distinctively or in their own imagination that contradict that believes, those same members will start questioning the credibility of the person, like, "ah, who should we believe?" and that the person who don't speak too positively of Chinese industry must be creditable because he don't sing praises of the product by his country.
However, that doesn't applied to other 'experts' (such as chief designer of some engine in Russia) that sing praises of the engines that were produced by the company that the chief designer are working in... .
Hmm... food for thought.
I'm not basing my confidence in his words JUST on his heritage. He is an air force general with significant prestige and will be briefed on the status of his future weapons. His prestige only gives more incentive for him not to bullsh*t in public, lending even more credibility to his statements.
Schumacher
Senior Member
You obviously try very hard but you still fall short.
How do the 2 articles contradict each other ? The general talks in general terms against complacency, with no details. That China still needs to work hard etc.
What do you expect him to say instead ? That he's 100% satisfied, no more work & investment in R&D is needed anymore ? LOL
Blackstone
Brigadier
Results are what matter most, and we don't see mass production of WS10A, so it's reasonable to be skeptical of designer or supplier claims. Once we see lots of WS10A rolling off production lines, we'll believe, and until then it's caveat emptor.
Quickie
Colonel
Well they're mass producing the WS-10A for the J-11s.
OTOH, (I think we've been through this before) it wouldn't be the smartest thing for them to put all their eggs in a basket by retrofitting the J-10As and older flanker with the new WS-10As (it isn't that new now of course but it was new just a while back) considering the logistical nightmare of modifying the aircraft to fit in the new engines not to mention the retraining of maintenance personnel to handle the new engines and having to adapt the maintenance facilities.
OTOH, (I think we've been through this before) it wouldn't be the smartest thing for them to put all their eggs in a basket by retrofitting the J-10As and older flanker with the new WS-10As (it isn't that new now of course but it was new just a while back) considering the logistical nightmare of modifying the aircraft to fit in the new engines not to mention the retraining of maintenance personnel to handle the new engines and having to adapt the maintenance facilities.
Last edited: