You flatter yourself, the account was registered and ready beforehand in order to discuss
Goldman Sach's war in the Ukrainian SSR among other things.
To
Lloyd Blankfein, our friends at
GS are just "
doing God's work."
It just so happened that while browsing the friendly forum, I was amazed to discover that not only is TsAGI's Su-27 in fact a Chinese indigenous invention,
Everyone and their dog know the J-11 series represents an evolution of the Su-27.
Sounds like my words ruffled some feathers. You may want to reread what was written, please pay extra attention to
modifiers.
but the exceedingly honest folks were prevented from selling it abroad as their own by mustache twirling villains in an agreement they signed with their own hands but immediately reneged on once production lines were set up by Sukhoi specialists.
It reminded me of rabbinic Israel-style bellyaching and crisis acting.
We're obviously both acolytes of realpolitik. Let's not waste time on normative shenanigans or moralizing nonsense.
Besides, crying about IP violations is probably
too American of a pastime for someone of your creed and virtues!
Though the funny thing is Russia spent over a decade crying and whining about alleged Chinese IP theft, only to end up benefiting from Chinese success in indigenizing, refining and further evolving the Su-27.
When Russia lost access to Ukrainian supply chains in 2014 as a result of sanctions triggered by the liberation of Crimea, Russian defense primes almost immediately turned to AVIC subsidiaries and other Chinese SOEs — that they had accused of misappropriating legacy Soviet IP for essential 'Flanker' components, many of which were formerly sourced from Kharkov, as well as "other things" long manufactured in Ukraine — in lieu of building up the requisite industrial capacity themselves.
Some of the parts they sourced en masse from China reportedly even ended up in HAL assembled Su-30MKI fighters, much to the displeasure of senior Indian officials — who from what I was told — only found out when a journalist started reaching out with questions.
The Russian spirit of entrepreneurship is incredibly pragmatic!
Why do you refer to the J-35 as the "JF-35?" Where is that nomenclature from?
Look in the mirror and think hard. It should be within your grasp.
Even the Pakistanis don't refer to the J-35/A as the JF-35, so really losing you here, dude . . .
What it certainly doesn't need is an obsolete airframe that stupidly cloned US soapbox designs from the 90's thinking them advanced.
You don't have to like the J-35/A, but bashing it with cliche accusations of Chinese CTRL+C/V is a disservice to your own credibility.
As stated, JF-35 does not meet soviet standards and operational requirements.
That's a good thing. It would be comically unproductive, if not absurd to orient a modern fighter design to the outdated standards of a failed empire that
collapsed over 30 years ago.
The journalist quack you cite is neither respected nor an expert, least of all on military matters.
Brookings, CFR, RUSI and their Yeltsinite wannabe ilk in Russia are not academic institutions, though they take great pains to pose as such.
These are lobbyist dens of ill repute where particularly verminous charlatants converge to bray familiar refrains and aggressively advance minoritarian interests like the fifth column they are.
You appear to believe that Ilya Kramnik, like most de facto and de jure lobbyists, spoke with ulterior motives while .
What were Ilya Kramnik's actual motives?
What was he really trying to achieve?
Do you believe Ilya Kramnik is looking to convince the Russian MoD to acquire complete Chinese weapons systems, and if so, to what ends?
What's in it for him?
For JF-35 exports which you seem so eager to push regardless of domestic needs, try India and Djibouti maybe. It is adequate for their level.
There is also Palau.
AVIC in general and SAC in particular have invested massive CAPEX to
construct a
new "
aviation and aerospace city" in Shenyang.
You might want to checkout
some of the
posts from the "
J-35A fighter (PLAAF) + FC-31 thread" on the production facilities being erected there:
I think the
696,000sqm is for the overall size inclusive of other buildings and/or even parts of the tarmac.
The building itself at
Plant 4 has a somewhat more modest area of about 288,000 sqm
I remember when the SAC factory was announced a few years ago with the size of its building, someone calculated this:
View attachment 156180
Needless to say, the J-35/A family will be produced en masse.
It'll take at least a couple years to ramp up production to triple digits, but IMHO an annual production rate of 200+ airframes is fairly achievable before the end of the decade, assuming there's a need for it. That should be "reasonably sufficient" for serving both the PLAAF and PLANAF, as well as export customers.
If we're to have a serious discussion here: China isn't going to export the J-35/A to India given the obvious political hurdles in play; but in markets where such obstructions are absent, the J-35/A represent serious competition to your beloved Su-57/E, as well as the Su-75, assuming it ever reaches production.
I imagine I'm not the only one here who grew up admiring beautiful Soviet designs like the T-10 — so don't think any reasonable adult present is here to denigrate Soviet achievements — even if a few of us like to be politely provocative for the sake of banter.
With that said, we should also acknowledge that between CAATSA and other Western sanctions impeding the export of Russian arms; Russia's prioritization of its ground forces over naval and to a lesser degree air capabilities, and associated defense industrial resources, due to ongoing efforts to
liberate Ukraine; and the years of neglect that its defense industry experienced, especially relative to the Soviet era in terms of CAPEX: a number of operators of Soviet and Russian fighters are going to replace aging MiGs and Sukhois with Chinese fighters.
Uzbekistan being perhaps the most current example:
Consensus on Weibo is that 204 is destined for export, most likely Uzbekistan. Another African country also confirmed orders.
is
next:
This should
not be something for Russia to be bitter or upset about: China is
not the one that'll threaten and/or sanction
and
for the (would be) acquisition of Russian arms.
A more productive approach, for both China and Russia, would be to cooperate in weaponizing the massive industrial capacity Beijing has built up and continues to expand against mutual adversaries and common
de facto enemies.
In fact, there's been examples of as much:
If China can aid Russia in mass producing loitering munitions — despite risks of Western sanctions as the current conflict in Ukraine rages — there's no reason China can't or won't enable Russian production of more complex and visible systems, especially once the
special military operation reaches a (temporary) conclusion.
