Actually...It is the other way around, that those Chinese members are sensitive that an Asian would dare to challenge them.
J-10 Thread III (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter crobato
- Start date
- Status
Schumacher
Senior Member
Interesting, from the way you snapped at TyroneG. It looks like you're oversensitive.
Not at all. More like amusement. Am an old guy and fairly new to this Internet thingie, as in I have been 'on line' within less than ten years. I have no Facebook account nor do I engage in any Internet social network. It has been my experience on anonymous Internet forums that whenever my origin is known to Chinese members, it is more the focus for them than on the contents of my arguments. And if that fact is unknown to some, it will be quickly made available to the ignorant so it can be fodder for personal attacks.
coolieno99
Junior Member
Japan was the first country to implement AESA technology on a military weapon system. They mount an AESA radar on a warship in 1989. It uses hybrid technology-combination of IC's and discrete components. MMIC didn't exist at that time. IIRC, Japan is most likely the first country to put an AESA radar on a space satellite. It's a SAR surveillance satellite.
Disclaimer: I am not Japanese.
Disclaimer: I am not Japanese.
I will jump in here.
I am Chinese. I didn't know your origin. I didn't care.
But I remember your argument that J-20 has flight control software bug, because you eyeballed from the photo of J-20 on the ground.
I truly believe you should be known for that argument, not your origin.
I said 'suspected'. And anyone who has any experience in designing flight control laws knows that such software is NOT immune to 'bugs'.
That's my point. You are the ONE! Everyone should know that. You are the one who "suspected" J-20's bug based on the different angle of vertical stabilizers when J-20 is on the ground.
Whatever your origin is, has zero relationship with any debate we have here. But people should know you by that debate.
Schumacher
Senior Member
LOL, he really did say that ? Thanks for the info. I agree that and his responses here say a lot more about his knowledge on the subject than his origin.
I clicked on this thread thinking there must have been some new advancement since so many people are posting in such a short time, then I see this...
Gambit, you've provided some good insights into AESA radar, but you are making straw man arguments, Tp was not making assumptions, but educated guess based on what information we have.
Now in order to dispute his guess you have to make better guess or provide evidence to the contrary, that's how this "internet thing" works.
Gambit, you've provided some good insights into AESA radar, but you are making straw man arguments, Tp was not making assumptions, but educated guess based on what information we have.
Now in order to dispute his guess you have to make better guess or provide evidence to the contrary, that's how this "internet thing" works.
I'm not stating anything regarding to the radar itself. I'm starting by restating what someone else is saying. Do you want to show me where he didn't say that? If so, how can I be wrong?
except that's what they are doing on J-10. Clearly having a nose like J-10 means that if you put a mechanical radar on there, it would not be able to use all of the space available.
I did not say those points are true. I said that if those are true, then the next point would come to true also. Now, do you understand the difference between the two?
This is actually really annoying me to no end, because you are clearly mislabeling my comments. Instead of actively to rebuke everyone on this thread, why don't you actually read clearly what people are trying to say first?
Now, as for the shape of AESA radar itself. They come in different shapes. I posted many of those pictures myself. Did I say AESA have to be certain shapes? I don't need you to lecture me.
Read this. Does this look like something where I'm saying 1 or 2 is true or something where I'm stating how 2 conjectures would arrived at a conclusion? Or that a result could point to some clues about the origin.
I have no clue why he saw the need to mention your ethnicity, but it's clear that he put his post to support your credentials. I would say that we have many others who have professional backgrounds here. A lot of them are respected for what they have to say even if it counters the hopes of Chinese members here. But it would be appropriate if you start by showing less hostility to others here.
Also, this is my final point on this. Try to have one final point and move forward. We are completely getting to a meaningless dispute. I don't know why race have to come into this at all.
- Status