J-20... The New Generation Fighter III

jobjed said:

Russian "help" was not help.

Click to expand...

it's like Harvard under-graduate saying that his education was "not an education" and he doesn't respect his tutors as he paid for education (did China paid anything for technology transfer starting from 50s, btw?) Are you idiot?

yakolev provide asisstant in the development of J-10,sukhoi also provide technical aid in the JH-7A project.
over all China still rely on foreign techical aid.

Not sure of Yakovlev/J-10 connection. It was help from SibNIIA though. Regarding Yakovlev, it holds patent rights for L-15 that should speak for itself.

challenge said:

yakolev provide asisstant in the development of J-10,sukhoi also provide technical aid in the JH-7A project.
over all China still rely on foreign techical aid.

Click to expand...

Unsubstantiated rumor as usual RQ you never changed care to provide source for your BS

Soviet Union did provide help to lay the foundation of Chinese aerospace industry in 50's. But they also tear apart the design blueprint for Mig 17. Again in 80's but this time around is more of mutual benefit. Had it not for Chinese purchase of Su 27 Sukhoi and Salyut will go bankrupt. So both side win

So in the way China had a lucky break in 80's when the only source of modernization if from Soviet Union.Since then they take their own path

MiG-29 said:

it does not make sense at all, most J-10s are less than a decade old some are less than 1 year old, same is J-11/Su-27, tell me why you replace engines that have 7-5 years old?

That does not make sense at all, aircraft like the F-14 were re engined but if China has WS-10 why you will spend money in a foreign engine? you will re engine 120 J-10 that have less than 7-5 years? that is just fantasy, tell me how many J-10s are build in China annually?
China might built 100 J-10s if the J-10 is exported, the F-16 is exported and build in Europe, Turkey, Korea and Japoan (AKA F-2) but F-16s use american engines.

why you will re-engine a mere 120 aircraft if you can build 100 J-10s with WS-10?

So the mostly likely reality is China builds 20-30 annualy and the Al-31s are going to be used for new J-10s and perhaps iin 2015 they will use WS-10s, but now the WS-10 is not ready an if WS-10 is not ready WS-15 is not even flying.

Click to expand...

A production capacity problem is the more likely reason why they bought more AL-31s. They're probably making more J-11s and J-10s than the production of WS-10s can keep up, particularly as they only just resolved their production quality problems. There's a reason why the J-10B is being tested with the WS-10. Opening up new lines of production will take time (factories don't just spring up at the snap of a finger), and the time frame probably matches with the induction of the J-10B. Until then they can't simply halt the production of new J-11s and J-10s.

This does not mean the WS-10 is not ready however. If it were not ready we wouldn't see them on so many J-11s equipped with them. It's very clear that the WS-10 has already entered mass production. It's probable that due to the limitations on production capacity the WS-10 is only going to J-11s until manufacturing of the engine can be expanded. That said, engine R&D and production is not a serial process, but a parallel one. Using the WS-10's production time to gauge the WS-15s is nonsensical and pointless.

flateric said:

it's like Harvard under-graduate saying that his education was "not an education" and he doesn't respect his tutors as he paid for education (did China paid anything for technology transfer starting from 50s, btw?) Are you idiot?

Click to expand...

I think some people are touchy about the word "help". For a lot of people in China it's usually loaded with the connotation that China can't do anything on its own. To extend that analogy about the Harvard undergraduate, for a lot of them it's like your professor treats you like you're an undergrad even after you've completed your dissertation

flateric said:

it's like Harvard under-graduate saying that his education was "not an education" and he doesn't respect his tutors as he paid for education (did China paid anything for technology transfer starting from 50s, btw?) Are you idiot?

Click to expand...

Don't worry about nationalistic fanboys, they're everywhere.

It's a matter of record that the Soviet Union gave China her industrial base, upon which all else springs. Once you have that everything else is basically trivial.

On the matter of paying - that's a very complicated issue, and the answer is 'yes and no'.. oddly enough. Suffice it to say Soviet Union extended a lot of credit to China, and had a lot of aid projects, but China also paid with goods and of course Mao considered he had paid for the loans with blood in the Korean War.

Lacrimosa said:

Don't worry about nationalistic fanboys, they're everywhere.

It's a matter of record that the Soviet Union gave China her industrial base, upon which all else springs. Once you have that everything else is basically trivial.

On the matter of paying - that's a very complicated issue, and the answer is 'yes and no'.. oddly enough. Suffice it to say Soviet Union extended a lot of credit to China, and had a lot of aid projects, but China also paid with goods and of course Mao considered he had paid for the loans with blood in the Korean War.

Click to expand...

...Until the 1960s. But I digress.

Anyway let's not talk about who had help from what. Beyond really obvious cases like the MiG-21/J-7 (even that is actually a bit complex) you can't really say who helped how much on what project without a top-down view on the whole project, and as anybody who worked in engineering project knows it's a bit pointless to talk about who built what in a sufficiently large project, doubly so when we are talking about retaining consultants.

The best you can say is 'X consulted Y on aerodynamics, and hired Z to help integrate W's engines on X'. Talking about this in general terms just inflame passions and get no useful information across.

We are talking about China's industrial foundation. Everybody here knows about the Sino-Soviet split.

Lacrimosa said:

... I hope you do realise we are talking about China's industrial foundation. Everybody here knows about the Sino-Soviet split.

Click to expand...

As it is contemporaneously or the history of? Those are two very different things, and it can be argued that China's industrial base as it is today has benefited a lot more from Western assistance than Russian assistance. There's also the part where China had to be largely independent on further development of its own industrial base after the Sino-Soviet split. Industry is not static, and the industrial base gets replaced and changed over constantly. What the Soviets contributed to China in terms of industrial base helped China get to where it is today in the historical sense, but they are on substance largely obsolete and irrelevant to the character and composition of today's Chinese industry (though you do see a resurgence of Russian assistance when things started to thaw a little, and then after the collapse of the Soviet Union).

Anyways, we digress, and I am not interested in having another discussion about Chinese and Russian industries in the comparative.