J-11 to J-19 aircraft INSIDER INFORMATION (from CJDBY)

Deino said:

Dead Wrong again ! So You think Sukhoi developed different canards for the Su-33, then the MKI, MKA and so on ... and later SAC a new set for the J-115
??? (only for the revised Su-27KUB it was different).

The original canard-concept for the Flanker was developed esp. in mind for the Su-33 and later adopted for the MKI ... and again the same canard-configuration is used - as SAC got the T-10K-3 via Ukraine - for the J-15, endof that story, what-ever You want to think.

How can anyone only be so stubborn ???

Deino

Click to expand...

Once again, canards, even if they are shaped the same, do not prove the fact that the airframes themselves were developed from each other. Canards are only a small part of the airframe.

If you say that the canards are a copy of the Su-33's, then that's fine, but saying that the entire airframe is a copy of the Su-33's, when it's actually from a Su-27SK, is nothing short of ignorance.

J-11B airframes uses modified intakes and centroplane, and the J-15 retains that.

The canard, you said it, is a CONCEPT. Using a CONCEPT is not called COPYING.

If everything went according to your concept theory, then I would say that the F-15 copies the MiG-25 since they both use side intakes.

SAC receiving the T-10K, unless they personally released a statement that it was used in developing J-15's airframe, means nothing in the development of the J-15.

Speaking of stubborn, take a good look in the mirror.

SinoSoldier said:

Speaking of stubborn, take a good look in the mirror.

Click to expand...

The difference being that almost universally everyone who knows their stuff would support Deinos view rather than yours... Tphuang's already wafted the cheese to you as well.

Try what you're saying now on some of the other forums and see what kind of response you get.

SinoSoldier said:

Again, the addition of canards to a J-11/Su-27SK airframe does not make it an automatic variant of the Su-33.

The airframe itself is composed of different parts like the intakes, centroplane, etc, and as far as that goes, those are directly copied from the Su-27SK airframe.

One of the supposed names of the J-15 was actually the J-11BH. The fact that the J-15 uses almost the same avionics and engines as the J-11B further impedes your theory.

You wouldn't call the Su-30MKI a variant of the Su-33, so stop it with the stereotypes.

BTW, tphuang, are you a big reader of Huitong's posts or Peishen's posts from CJDBY?

Click to expand...

What are you talking about? Su-33's basic version uses the same avionics and weapons as su-27, does that mean they are the same? There is a huge difference between airframe similarities and avionics/weaponry similarities.

I do read huitong's posts, but he is more of a summarizer of all the legitimate sources rather than being a source himself. Peishen has some interesting stuff, but I'm not going to idolize some guy and accept everything he says. I will actually open eyes and look. I'm not going to go all fanboys. I will wait for photographical evidence and then form my own opinions.

SinoSoldier said:

Once again, canards, even if they are shaped the same, do not prove the fact that the airframes themselves were developed from each other. Canards are only a small part of the airframe.

If you say that the canards are a copy of the Su-33's, then that's fine, but saying that the entire airframe is a copy of the Su-33's, when it's actually from a Su-27SK, is nothing short of ignorance.

J-11B airframes uses modified intakes and centroplane, and the J-15 retains that.

The canard, you said it, is a CONCEPT. Using a CONCEPT is not called COPYING.

If everything went according to your concept theory, then I would say that the F-15 copies the MiG-25 since they both use side intakes.

SAC receiving the T-10K, unless they personally released a statement that it was used in developing J-15's airframe, means nothing in the development of the J-15.

Speaking of stubborn, take a good look in the mirror.

Click to expand...

what modified intakes? J-11B'a airframe is basically the same as su-27sk. And J-15, if it is a naval fighter, cannot possibly be the same as J-11B. Do you have any concept of the amount of pounding and erosion that a naval air frame would have to handle that a air force version doesn't? And then you have to use a modified engine for naval fighter to give it more lift and handle the salt water erosion. On top of that, there are other factors like arrester hook

Hi,

Could any of you can provide the images or pics of J15 - J16 - J18 - J19.

timepass said:

Hi,

Could any of you can provide the images or pics of J15 - J16 - J18 - J19.

Click to expand...

I hope you realize that we don't even know if the J-16/17/18/19 exist, let alone have pics of them.

The J-15 photos are available though.

Read this thread, and then read this article:



Apparently Richard Fisher has some agreements.

Good for him. Until real evidence or rumors comes to hand we're still going to disregard these projects as near BS...

SinoSoldier said:

Read this thread, and then read this article:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Apparently Richard Fisher has some agreements.

Click to expand...

I wish I were paid to sit around and write about baseless internet rumours to!

Hey guys, some new for you. It might surprise you...

Huitong just added some info on the J-18.

So now we have the J-16 in development (almost certainly)
The J-17 and J-19 are further improved variants of the J-11B.
But now he is saying that the J-18 is a medium-weight stealthy aircraft with a conventional layout. He says it could fly before 2012.

Now, he does admit that "not all of these stealth fighter projects will eventually enter the service since PLAAF simply cannot afford all of them."

He also says a single-engined light stealth fighter is under development at 611.

Not to mention this stealth-enhanced JF-17.

I think things have gone a little crazy.

^ I think a good part of SACs rumored projects based on the flanker won't materialize but the others seem feasible.
I mean they are bound to be working on something past the J-11B/J-15, JF-17 and J-20 and I feel that SAC and CAC have the experience now to work on multiple projects... even if most are only developments on existing aircraft.

We'll see with time I suppose. Hopefully some more detailed "rumors" will come to light this year