This whole plane seems much more like a Su-47 concept plane the longer it goes on. And a domestic propaganda push.
Aside from the nose that they ripped off the F-35 data they stole this plane is nothing but an 80s piece of technology painted to look cool. And the canards are a retarded idea contradicting the entire point of its stealth shaping.
Fins sticking out of the plane are one of the hardest things to make stealthy and do against the whole idea. (note future stealth concept planes don't have any fins anywhere at all)
On the contrary, there are some stealth designs out there that do have canards, it's the overall shaping, not a simple "canards = no stealth" yes/no answer.
For example, the US X-36 stealth prototype came with canards and some of the pre-F-35 designs were also canarded.
In short, it's how radiation reacts with the whole of the plane that makes "stealth", not just a single part. For all we know, fins might cause wave interference that degrades detection or even reflect the energy back in a totally different direction. Unless you test it out with an emitter and detector, it's really hard to say what improves or degrades stealth. It's one thing that doesn't lend well to eyeballing.
We don't know what for sure the Chinese intend with the J20. It could be a one-off, tech demonstrator or just the first with the follow production models looking different. The J10A is markedly different from J10B follow up. Too many Western observers are dismissing it out of hand when we don't even know the requirements!
I think it is a mistake to just dismiss everything from China as a Western knockoff, we will get our asses handed to us one day with that mentality!
Will, i'm not even really a plane guy..armored vehicles are my thing but your misinformation is awe inspiring. how could one guy get so much shit wrong. the J-10 is based off the Israeli Lavi....dude. go back to school
"IAI Lavi – an ambitious Israeli production of a modern fighter aircraft. The IAI Lavi was largely based on the existing American F-16 fighter jet, and controversy led to the US pressuring Israel to discontinue production and later controversy of charges Israel provided China with blueprints leading to the Chinese Chengdu J-10 fighter known to also be based on the US F-16."
J-10 and Lavi are both based off the F-16. To say the J10 is based off the Lavi instead of the f16 is too ignore the lavi is based on the F-16 with canards.
This all just gives more reason why the Chinese would be interested in the original battle proven product, the F16, in possession of the pakis. And why the rumors they studied those F16s in depth is more than believable. (the J-10 looks MORE like the f16 than the lavi... you blind?)
"go back to school" don't you have a truck to drive somewhere or something mister big vehicle guy?
hmmm if you're talking big cause i run 33s on my truck then ok, but i've seen much bigger. but back to your point.
you said the J-10 was based off information taken from the Pakistani F-16. i pointed out the exact plan that info was based off.
you're an interesting person. silly as hell but interesting. i don't think i've seen a better example of parsing words, back pedaling and then assuming superiority based off nothing before in my life.
"you said the J-10 was based off information taken from the Pakistani F-16. i pointed out the exact plan that info was based off."
You pointed out a rumor and I pointed out a different one. Of course I know you think only you are ever right about anything and any rumor beyond those that escape your lips are blasphemy.
But the one assuming superiority based on nothing is you, pretty clearly.
It still stands that my rumor is just as plausible, and that the lavi was based on the F16 anyway so I'm kinda right no matter how you wanna play with it.
Unless you have some kind of written in stone proof the J10 is based on the Lavi only? Because unlike you I know we are both going off of the rumor mill more than any credible fact we can prove.
But the J-10 looks more like an F-16 than anything else, and only a blind person could deny that.
And no you're not doing a good job as coming off as clever like you think you are
"In 2006, the Russian Siberian Aeronautical Research Institute (SibNIA) confirmed its participation in the J-10 program; SibNIA claimed to have only observed and instructed as "scientific guides", while its engineers also believed the J-10 was not only based on the Lavi, but also incorporated significant foreign technology and expertise.[22][not in citation given]"
you're on my ignore list. you deserve to go on my ban list. i'm done. go jerk off your mother.
Doesn't disprove that the chines studied paki F16s, doesn't change that the J10 looks much more like an F-16 than a Lavi other than the canards, and doesn't change the fact THE LAVI IS BASED OFF THE F16 THUS THE j10 is based off the 16 ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. And trusting a RUSSIAN source?
WHAT A JOKE.
No f16? No lavi. No lavi, no crap for you to talk about how the J-10 is a lavi copy and not an f16.\
"go jerk off your mother."
Your favorite past time? Real mature. I thought I was already on your ignore list, keep me on it next time please if you act like a 10 yo.
Agree with Sol, if you believe J10 is a copy, it is generally assumed that the Chinese got help from the Israelis LAVI project with some help from Russian engineers integrating Lyulka-Saturn AL-31FN turbofan.
I think the danger is constantly putting their technology down because it is a knock off, so what where they got it from? If it works and performs, it will kill our pilots just as well if it was completely made in China from A to Z. It's the same mindset that got us in trouble in WWII with the Japanese, most US observers said Zero fighter was garbage because it was made in Japan, well, that didn't work out to well....
Agreed NICO, the pilot that gets killed won't care if it was a knockoff built in the darkest reaches of Africa, all that matters is if the plane can kill. If it does, then it is a problem, no matter where it is from.
Carelessness kills. Getting careless because of a habit of putting others down is unnecessary risk.
.jpg)
.jpg)
The top photo looks a bit off.
ReplyDeleteCMR said the first photo was shopped but the 2nd and 3rd are real.
DeleteThis whole plane seems much more like a Su-47 concept plane the longer it goes on. And a domestic propaganda push.
DeleteAside from the nose that they ripped off the F-35 data they stole this plane is nothing but an 80s piece of technology painted to look cool. And the canards are a retarded idea contradicting the entire point of its stealth shaping.
Fins sticking out of the plane are one of the hardest things to make stealthy and do against the whole idea. (note future stealth concept planes don't have any fins anywhere at all)
On the contrary, there are some stealth designs out there that do have canards, it's the overall shaping, not a simple "canards = no stealth" yes/no answer.
DeleteFor example, the US X-36 stealth prototype came with canards and some of the pre-F-35 designs were also canarded.
In short, it's how radiation reacts with the whole of the plane that makes "stealth", not just a single part. For all we know, fins might cause wave interference that degrades detection or even reflect the energy back in a totally different direction. Unless you test it out with an emitter and detector, it's really hard to say what improves or degrades stealth. It's one thing that doesn't lend well to eyeballing.
We don't know what for sure the Chinese intend with the J20. It could be a one-off, tech demonstrator or just the first with the follow production models looking different. The J10A is markedly different from J10B follow up. Too many Western observers are dismissing it out of hand when we don't even know the requirements!
ReplyDeleteI think it is a mistake to just dismiss everything from China as a Western knockoff, we will get our asses handed to us one day with that mentality!
I have to say its dismissed as a western knock off because we know it looks like things they stole the data too.
DeleteAnd even the J-10 is rumored to be largely based on access the Chinese had to the pakis F-16s. I believe it entirely.
Will, i'm not even really a plane guy..armored vehicles are my thing but your misinformation is awe inspiring. how could one guy get so much shit wrong. the J-10 is based off the Israeli Lavi....dude. go back to school
DeleteYea you clearly are not a plane guy.
Delete"IAI Lavi – an ambitious Israeli production of a modern fighter aircraft. The IAI Lavi was largely based on the existing American F-16 fighter jet, and controversy led to the US pressuring Israel to discontinue production and later controversy of charges Israel provided China with blueprints leading to the Chinese Chengdu J-10 fighter known to also be based on the US F-16."
J-10 and Lavi are both based off the F-16. To say the J10 is based off the Lavi instead of the f16 is too ignore the lavi is based on the F-16 with canards.
This all just gives more reason why the Chinese would be interested in the original battle proven product, the F16, in possession of the pakis. And why the rumors they studied those F16s in depth is more than believable. (the J-10 looks MORE like the f16 than the lavi... you blind?)
"go back to school"
don't you have a truck to drive somewhere or something mister big vehicle guy?
hmmm if you're talking big cause i run 33s on my truck then ok, but i've seen much bigger. but back to your point.
Deleteyou said the J-10 was based off information taken from the Pakistani F-16. i pointed out the exact plan that info was based off.
you're an interesting person. silly as hell but interesting. i don't think i've seen a better example of parsing words, back pedaling and then assuming superiority based off nothing before in my life.
"you said the J-10 was based off information taken from the Pakistani F-16. i pointed out the exact plan that info was based off."
DeleteYou pointed out a rumor and I pointed out a different one. Of course I know you think only you are ever right about anything and any rumor beyond those that escape your lips are blasphemy.
But the one assuming superiority based on nothing is you, pretty clearly.
It still stands that my rumor is just as plausible, and that the lavi was based on the F16 anyway so I'm kinda right no matter how you wanna play with it.
Unless you have some kind of written in stone proof the J10 is based on the Lavi only? Because unlike you I know we are both going off of the rumor mill more than any credible fact we can prove.
But the J-10 looks more like an F-16 than anything else, and only a blind person could deny that.
And no you're not doing a good job as coming off as clever like you think you are
"In 2006, the Russian Siberian Aeronautical Research Institute (SibNIA) confirmed its participation in the J-10 program; SibNIA claimed to have only observed and instructed as "scientific guides", while its engineers also believed the J-10 was not only based on the Lavi, but also incorporated significant foreign technology and expertise.[22][not in citation given]"
Deleteyou're on my ignore list. you deserve to go on my ban list. i'm done. go jerk off your mother.
That quote proves less than nothing.
DeleteDoesn't disprove that the chines studied paki F16s, doesn't change that the J10 looks much more like an F-16 than a Lavi other than the canards, and doesn't change the fact THE LAVI IS BASED OFF THE F16 THUS THE j10 is based off the 16 ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. And trusting a RUSSIAN source?
WHAT A JOKE.
No f16? No lavi. No lavi, no crap for you to talk about how the J-10 is a lavi copy and not an f16.\
"go jerk off your mother."
Your favorite past time? Real mature. I thought I was already on your ignore list, keep me on it next time please if you act like a 10 yo.
A bit off topic Sol but are you a Ford, Chevy, or Ram guy?
DeleteFord but the 2014 Chevy is sweeeeeet..
DeleteAgree with Sol, if you believe J10 is a copy, it is generally assumed that the Chinese got help from the Israelis LAVI project with some help from Russian engineers integrating Lyulka-Saturn AL-31FN turbofan.
ReplyDeleteI think the danger is constantly putting their technology down because it is a knock off, so what where they got it from? If it works and performs, it will kill our pilots just as well if it was completely made in China from A to Z. It's the same mindset that got us in trouble in WWII with the Japanese, most US observers said Zero fighter was garbage because it was made in Japan, well, that didn't work out to well....
Agreed NICO, the pilot that gets killed won't care if it was a knockoff built in the darkest reaches of Africa, all that matters is if the plane can kill. If it does, then it is a problem, no matter where it is from.
DeleteCarelessness kills. Getting careless because of a habit of putting others down is unnecessary risk.