Care to explain where this - in fact quite bolt - claim is from?
It was somewhere on SDF
Care to explain where this - in fact quite bolt - claim is from?
This would be true for everything China sells. The point is that you trade it for something you feel like its worth. Perhaps this is paying for greater factory capacity. Or R&D somewhere else. Even preventing a third party from being tied to American MIC or just denying the US a sale is valuable.Comparing France to China is like comparing cherries to watermelons. I don't exactly think that every J-35 export is a loss to China, but every export with the WS-19 engine does, fundamentally deprive the army from having a domestic variant of the aircraft.
Thing is, China isn't making fifth generation fighters at nearly the rate it does steel or solar panels, there also is the problem that exporting state of the art or near state of the art weaponry is a much more delicate affair than exporting Xinjiang melons. Of course this argument can be countered with the example of the Americans selling the F-35, their (near) crown jewel. But the issue with this is that the Americans are almost exclusively selling them not to any kind of free customers but to vassals and quite rich ones, that can and do pay exorbitant premiums that reflect not so much the product as protection money and tribute. If for example China's relationship with Japan and Australia was the same as the one it has with the Wa State of Myanmar today and could induce them to pay a billion yuan apiece then yes, exports would be a non-brainer. But none of the internationally recognized states today share such a relationship with China and those that even vaguely resemble this have nowhere near the deep pockets of the countries of the Euro-Atlantic bloc. That is not to say that I view such early exports a catastrophic mistake, it's simply, in my view suboptimal.This would be true for everything China sells. The point is that you trade it for something you feel like its worth. Perhaps this is paying for greater factory capacity. Or R&D somewhere else. Even preventing a third party from being tied to American MIC or just denying the US a sale is valuable.
I remember when the 6th gens first flew, I joked that they already hurt the US badly without firing a shot by lowering Lockheed Martin shares by 15%.
You’d think that the latter would have higher electrical power output from WS-19…Apparently the Naval J-31 version has a better radar than the Air Force J-35, for example.
Allegedly J-35A has downgraded avionics so it could be made as cheap as possible but has the better engine due to "late comers' advantage".You’d think that the latter would have higher electrical power output from WS-19…
You’d think that the latter would have higher electrical power output from WS-19…
Of all the things to skimp out on radar seems to be an odd choice.I don't think it's a matter of available electricity.
Just that they chose a radar with a lower cost.
If the J-20 has a GaN-on-SIC radar, then that implies the naval J-35 also has a GaN-on-SIC radar.
It also implies the Air Force J-35A has chosen a lower-cost GaN or even GaA radar.
Of all the things to skimp out on radar seems to be an odd choice.