If you had been an expert on finance, then you would not have presented as a 'compliance report', when it's in fact a research note.
Okey-dokey, since you have used so many exclamation marks, you must be right. We should all be closely reading 'compliance reports' from AVIC, CSIC, CSSC, Norinco, and others to glean classified information we're are interested in, including status on such projects as the H-20 bomber, the next-gen carrier fighter, nuclear carriers, rail guns, and so on. Thank you!
Still, you haven't answered my questions: do you read Chinese, and if you do, have you actually read the before posting it here? In other words, have you actually vetted this information, which you gleaned from a fanboy forum, before passing it onto SDF?
I spend some year learning Chinese as a child. My Chinese is only good only for conversation but not reading disclosure for sure .
disclosure. Look I am not saying that AVIC produce WS 15 But they have been working on it for at least 15 or 20 years now
And J 20 need to be produced in large number which foreclose using AL31 as it defeat the purpose
It is about time that they finalize the design and start the trial
And we have heard improvement in the longevity and heat resistance of turbine blade which go to the heart of WS 15 hitting the final mile .
Couldnt find any j-20 related info in the last 10 posts... Mind moving this di*kfighting to the members club room please?..
Maybe this can distract from the current back and forth. A photo of a supposed exam paper.
Well the discussion was how people follow speculation and supposedly how military writers are more reliable. I gave examples to the contrary from the Pentagon down to military writers all getting it wrong. If I made the charge without showing examples, how would it appear? Before the J-20 emerged I would say military writers in the US were at least three years behind what was going on in China and that information passed through person to person until someone dared to write about it. These days military writers are getting their information direct from reading sites like these or Google translating Chinese sites... the very sites claimed to be only filled with the speculation of fanboys. I already know some people think when military writers in the US write their articles, it must come from a secret Pentagon source to where they get their information from moles and spies planted in China. No they just read these sites and Google translate Chinese web sites. How do I know this? Because as long as, I, a civilian with no military expertise who has been reading stuff on the internet, all that I see in these articles written by military writers is what has been discussed, the good and the bad, on sites like these that talk about the Chinese military choosing and picking or not picking what they don't want to like in a buffet to satisfy their own geo-political appetite.
Found this video on youtube recently. It's possibly the only one that isn't robot voiced Indian or Vietnamese videos that slam anything Chinese. Remains quite partial throughout with surprisingly no comment on WS-15 engine delays. Some comments from a supposed British liaison officer to the US, Jim Smith (probably fictitious).