SamuraiBlue
Captain
You aced it.
The twitter is saying he can't make heads or tails with the past coding system.
Chinese purchase of Su-35
- Thread starter flyzies
- Start date
The twitter is saying he can't make heads or tails with the past coding system.
Maybe, but I'm still waiting to see those first four birds on the Ramp in Chinese markings??? We haven't seen that yet?? This is beyond the screwiest deal I've ever seen??? Its just wacky! and I thought the Indian/French Rafale deal was messed up??(it was!)
Last edited:
From the articles I read, Japan doesn't care so much about SU35 but more about the 117S thrust vectoring tech being absorbed by China and then applied to already deadly J20.
Japan ATD-X only has ugly , junior level thrust vectoring like this
Japan ATD-X only has ugly , junior level thrust vectoring like this
Attachments
-
vector.jpg
This is hilarious, you are talking about propaganda while using an utterly absurd & useless way of calculating the accident rate to support your theory.
By completely ignoring the frequency of usage (# of departures/flights), your proposed method is completely useless.
YOU! be sure and post the first picture of the J-20 with OVT, Heh!, HEH!, HEH! I really don't think that's happening any time soon, they will be re-writing the WHOLE FCS program in order to do that ace, you have no idea what that would entail.
Not saying it couldn't happen??? but not very likely in the near term, for one thing, it would be a wholesale re-write of China's take on OVT, not a single bird that we have seen yet belonging to China wears OVT???
Japan's ATD-X is a serious aircraft, they have access to OVT if they are interested,,,,,
kwaigonegin
Colonel
I agree with B787's assertion that the SU 35s sale has more to do with the 117S than anything else however my take on it is different than everyone else here. It's not about thrust etc or even the actual engine itself. In that sense I believe China is catching up fast.
I believe China wants 3D vectoring and I believe they are still behind Russia and certainly the US.
Multi Axis thrust vectoring is a very difficult science and takes many many years of experimenting and research.. It's easy these days to make the nozzles vector anywhere. A backyard engineer can probably pull it off HOWEVER what is very difficult is full integration into the digital FCS. That is the Achilles heel in my opinion for China's jet engines.
You have to remember that vectoring for super maneuverability is usually done in the aircraft's post stall regime when the full advantaged of TVC usually comes into play. If you don't get it right, the aircraft crashes.
The USAF/NASA etc spent decades flying all sorts of experimental aircraft trying to understand TVC and wrote millions of lines of codes to finally get it right. Even then it's not 100%.
I have not seen China pursuing such as aggressive research program when it comes to TVC. Russia has certainly more experience with these types of engines and I believe that played a big part in the SU 35 purchase. We also don't know how much ToT or knowledge sharing goes in with that deal.
I believe China wants 3D vectoring and I believe they are still behind Russia and certainly the US.
Multi Axis thrust vectoring is a very difficult science and takes many many years of experimenting and research.. It's easy these days to make the nozzles vector anywhere. A backyard engineer can probably pull it off HOWEVER what is very difficult is full integration into the digital FCS. That is the Achilles heel in my opinion for China's jet engines.
You have to remember that vectoring for super maneuverability is usually done in the aircraft's post stall regime when the full advantaged of TVC usually comes into play. If you don't get it right, the aircraft crashes.
The USAF/NASA etc spent decades flying all sorts of experimental aircraft trying to understand TVC and wrote millions of lines of codes to finally get it right. Even then it's not 100%.
I have not seen China pursuing such as aggressive research program when it comes to TVC. Russia has certainly more experience with these types of engines and I believe that played a big part in the SU 35 purchase. We also don't know how much ToT or knowledge sharing goes in with that deal.
How is that junior level thrust vectoring?
So, what's this business about Jews and the inquisition then?
Maybe, but we have not seen a lot of aggressive research in China that ends up surprising us when they show up on a tarmac.I agree with B787's assertion that the SU 35s sale has more to do with the 117S than anything else however my take on it is different than everyone else here. It's not about thrust etc or even the actual engine itself. In that sense I believe China is catching up fast.
I believe China wants 3D vectoring and I believe they are still behind Russia and certainly the US.
Multi Axis thrust vectoring is a very difficult science and takes many many years of experimenting and research.. It's easy these days to make the nozzles vector anywhere. A backyard engineer can probably pull it off HOWEVER what is very difficult is full integration into the digital FCS. That is the Achilles heel in my opinion for China's jet engines.
You have to remember that vectoring for super maneuverability is usually done in the aircraft's post stall regime when the full advantaged of TVC usually comes into play. If you don't get it right, the aircraft crashes.
The USAF/NASA etc spent decades flying all sorts of experimental aircraft trying to understand TVC and wrote millions of lines of codes to finally get it right. Even then it's not 100%.
I have not seen China pursuing such as aggressive research program when it comes to TVC. Russia has certainly more experience with these types of engines and I believe that played a big part in the SU 35 purchase. We also don't know how much ToT or knowledge sharing goes in with that deal.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
Well that's my point exactly.. why reinvent the wheel when if possible you purchase the work someone else has already done? allows you to somewhat leapfrog initial core technologies and breaktroughs with minimal research and resources.
I would do the same thing. Heck if you think about it that's how most of the world work these days.There's nothing wrong with it per se as long as the 'originator' agrees to the transaction for monetary or other compensation in return.
That's exactly what licensing and ToT is.
Right, if you're talking about the SU-35s being purchased and flown to China, it doesn't just "show up on the ramp?" it takes cashola, and LOTS of it
Now if you're suggesting that China has already been doing all that research, and tomorrow or next week, or next year, they will pull a J-20 out to the flight line with OVT, that's NOT going to happen.
We have ONE production aircraft with OVT, the F-22 Raptor, and as our friend the Engineer always asks??? why, why if its so great don't we have F-15's, F-16's, and F-18s all "retro-fitted" with OVT. The long and short answer is?? its not worth the trouble.