It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

J-10,from China,I am proud of it

page: 18
0
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 12:45 AM
link   
I wonder what it will look like after an AMRAAM hits it




posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 01:17 AM
link   
chinese aam sd10


performance:

AIM-120C>SD10>P77>snake>AIM-120A/B



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 02:41 AM
link   


The tell-tale sign of a bad design.

Frankly the J-10 does not impress. It'a a rip-off of a Eurofighter-style concept with one engine missing and bad accompanying weaponry. Should be interesting to see...


D

posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 02:50 AM
link   
Of course it won't be the best plane straight off. As many have already said, you can't expect China to have the greatest plane just like that. They have been modernising for the past few decades and it will take a few more before they can even think about competing with the US for air superiority.



posted on Aug, 26 2004 @ 04:26 AM
link   
Somebody said J10 is less advanced than JSF and F22,so it is Useless.I want to say:Rome is not built up in one day.Surely China can't make a fighterplane which is as advanced as US-Made,but TAKING THE FIRST STEP IS VERY IMPORTANT.I know some of the Americans hope China cant make fireplane herself forever.


[edit on 26-8-2004 by Justicer]



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 09:52 PM
link   
lalalalala jesus was there any chinese here before



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 11:41 PM
link   
The J-10's capabilites stand to be tested... promisnig but unproven..
Same with all recent chinese military developments and personnel..



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justicer
Some people said that different countries have different histories,bur there is a fact:
Before the oil and gas in South Chinese Sea were found,it's before 1979(i cant remember the exact year),those countries admit that those islands was belonged to China.
After the oil and gae were found ,they changed their faces,saying:"It's belonged to me."


[edit on 25-8-2004 by Justicer]


Can you give a source on that?..
Don't the chinese have the same hypocritical approach towards siberia??



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 01:10 AM
link   
Communist China will not have a fighter as advanced as the west, until it stop making copies of other's jets



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Of course it won't be the best plane straight off. As many have already said, you can't expect China to have the greatest plane just like that.


Ok granted, the pro chine should stop talking about it like it is so advanced and formidable.


They have been modernising for the past few decades and it will take a few more before they can even think about competing with the US for air superiority.


Not exactly in a few decades they will be where our cutting edge tech is today, and we will have moved on to better and more advanced stuff.



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 01:44 AM
link   


Ok granted, the pro chine should stop talking about it like it is so advanced and formidable.


It meant to be a fighter bomber, a 4th generation fighter armed with R-77s or SD-10s and a 4.5th generation radar is already good enough to match up to the MiG-29s and F-18s Russia and America fields respectively. It is advanced enough to make a difference in a war with Taiwan, where it is on par with the F-16s Taiwan has.


Not exactly in a few decades they will be where our cutting edge tech is today, and we will have moved on to better and more advanced stuff.


Agreed. America is the only country nowadays to have real stealth in a plane, and I won't be surprised if they are working on ways to detect stealth planes in case the Chinese or Russians manage to build one. The J-10 is already a big leap, and integration into the PLAAF shows that it will be used for a long time to come, replacing the obsolete J-7s and unstable J-8s.



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 03:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Of course it won't be the best plane straight off. As many have already said, you can't expect China to have the greatest plane just like that.


Ok granted, the pro chine should stop talking about it like it is so advanced and formidable.


what fighter would you consider a match for the f-15 f-16???
the j-10 is more than a match for the f-16. BVR carnards... you consider anything non-american unsofitcated. i doubt america will be a superpower in 50years. they might have a super dupa cool army but thats nothing when you dont control the worlds enonomy.

if china spends as much as america does it would also have a f-22 carriers. but it chooses not to becuase they want to improve the life of the citizens.




They have been modernising for the past few decades and it will take a few more before they can even think about competing with the US for air superiority.


Not exactly in a few decades they will be where our cutting edge tech is today, and we will have moved on to better and more advanced stuff.

read this

XXJ is most probably still in the wind modeling and radar reflection testing stage. I personally don't believe that the project is "cemented" yet, that SAC and CAC are both---as expected---is studying into fifth generation technologies. Afterall, if these companies are expected to survive in the future, they better.

As for avionics, they can be upgraded. Maybe the F-22's computers are still using Pentium technology, but those on the F-16 Block 60 and the Gripen seems a lot more up to date. I don't believe the avionics on the F-22 will stay as is, subsequent batches will get upgraded avionics which is the typical pattern of all maturing platforms, subsequent problems of late aside.

The US fielding a better, more mature Raptor in the decade ahead isn't the issue. The problem is the technology cycle has lengthened to the point that the Raptor and the F-35 is expected to stay in service for half a century now, which is more than enough time for a competitor to play catch up, or find an asymetrical solution. Stealth is no longer the dark technology it once was; like atomic and digital technology, it has proliferated. The basics are well understood, the phenomena duplicatable. The followers simply follow a path that has already been broken out and laid for them. Thus they can spend less, and yet learn from the pioneer's mistakes to come out with a cost efficient product, maybe better, or many times, even inferior yet acceptable.

In that period, someone would catch up, and today's superfighter is tomorrow's just average fighter. It has happened so many times before in history, the superarmy-superweapon-supernewparadigm in warfare and technology become matched and evened out, and eventually obsoleted.

My view is this, based on current patterns, the Raptor may have at least one to two versions, maybe like an FA-22A or FA-22C. Then rather than try to push the envelope of the platform with more refinements and development, you're going to try to change the rules of the game again, by obsoleting the Raptor itself (along with the JSF). This is another more megabucks spent, which benefits the industrial military complex more than continuing to refine the Raptor.

Once again you reinvent the paradigm, this time, with small stealth robotic UCAVs. While traditionalists argue that there is no substitute for the man in the wheel, there are some undeniable benefits having no man in the wheel can bring.

The aircraft is not limited by human limits of G-forces, which is 9G. There is no way you can outmaneuver a robot who has light speed digital reflexes and won't be outcold in maneuvers of over 20G.

Without a pilot, the plane can be made much smaller and slimmer, reducing radar reflection into new levels. This also means aerodynamic and performance advantages. You can create an aircraft that is a 'pure body' without any consideration for fuselage that has to house the "living quarters" for a human.

You don't worry about casualties. The robot is expendable. This is good to hear for the casualty adverse US media, audience and Congress.

No need to cloth, feed, train and pay salaries to a robot. The Pentagon saves a lot of money which will be paid to the robot makers.

And let's not forget, he's upgradable. He can be programmed with new algorhythms which will continue to enhance his performance.

Sure he may have bugs, but then so is mankind. But robotic bugs are easier to fix than the basic flaws of being human.

So by the time the PLAAF might be having its hordes of J-XX, its headache may not be Raptor-D, but the hordes of new generation robotic stealth fighters.

That is until China also gets to make its own robot fighters as well.



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 07:59 PM
link   

if china spends as much as america does it would also have a f-22 carriers. but it chooses not to becuase they want to improve the life of the citizens.


You can spend as much has you want if you don't have the know how your not going anywhere.


the j-10 is more than a match for the f-16. BVR carnards... you consider anything non-american unsofitcated.


No I’m actually quite impressed d with the Su-30, EF Typhoon, and I don't even like the F-16 they are a good multi-role fighter but they suck at A2A combat so the don't impress me that much.


i doubt america will be a superpower in 50years. they might have a super dupa cool army but thats nothing when you dont control the worlds enonomy.


You think china can sustain the same level of economic growth that it has now? Please. your economy is already going down its not as high as it was years ago. Its only growing this fast now because your doing what other nations did over a span of 50 years in a couple of decades, when you level off its going be a different story.



posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23


You can spend as much has you want if you don't have the know how your not going anywhere.


lol. china has heaps of scientist that research things like this. RCS new RAM paint. its not that technical building a aircraft air frame





You think china can sustain the same level of economic growth that it has now? Please. your economy is already going down its not as high as it was years ago. Its only growing this fast now because your doing what other nations did over a span of 50 years in a couple of decades, when you level off its going be a different story.


china cant sustain that level of growth for ever (10%). but can sustain a high level of 7-8 %. the chinese economy didn't stop becuase the growth had finished. chinese leaders purposly stopped high level economic growth.

china is already moving towards move high-tech equipment .cars televisions computers. its just a matter of time before china becomes the worlds largest economy.

in the future whats america going to export?



posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 03:22 AM
link   
american arogan!!!



posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 07:41 AM
link   
chinese jealousy
kind of funny and pathetic at the same time.



posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
The J-10's capabilites stand to be tested... promisnig but unproven..
Same with all recent chinese military developments and personnel..
Same as F22 et al. Your point is?



posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Isn't it nice ???

forum.keypublishing.co.uk...

Cheers, Deino



posted on Mar, 30 2006 @ 01:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by planeman

Originally posted by Daedalus3
The J-10's capabilites stand to be tested... promisnig but unproven..
Same with all recent chinese military developments and personnel..
Same as F22 et al. Your point is?


Point being that this is China's first fighter and so the 'unproven' bit stands out more than maybe the F-22/Typhoon/Rafale and maybe the Gripen as well.



posted on Mar, 30 2006 @ 01:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinatea
chinese aam sd10


performance:

AIM-120C>SD10>P77>snake>AIM-120A/B



If the P-77 is the same as the R-77 then that assessment seems to be incorrect.



new topics




 
0
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join