All chinese aircrafts are pathetic copies

page: 13
1
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lucretius
yes I just stated that


They did not get one, as I have stated.




posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 10:57 AM
link   
Do you think the guy drifting down on his chute will worry about having been shot down by 'pathetic copy' Whats the matter? Did you get food poisoning from some beef chow mein or something?



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Do you think the guy drifting down on his chute will worry about having been shot down by 'pathetic copy'


Who is going to get shot down the guy in the F-15? F14? or F/A-22? Please don't make me laugh you’ll need more than reverse engineered F-16 to shoot those down.

This


Is not going to get shoot down by this



[edit on 28-3-2005 by WestPoint23]



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Who is going to get shot down the guy in the F-15? F14? or F/A-22? Please don't make me laugh you’ll need more than reverse engineered F-16 to shoot those down.



What a load of cocksure bull$hit. It wont work with an Aussie mate so don't even try it. Some panicky cretin is bound to pick their nose, stall and end up in the middle of a burst of 20mm eventually. Its the man not the machine Westpoint.

[edit on 28/3/2005 by JamesBlonde]



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
i agree. The F-2 is not a copy, but a product of collboration. but its NOT ORIGINAL






I think you definitly have got logical problem. I am wondering what you guys are thinking: If the originally is perfect. We all in the world will still be in the stone age. We learn from each other and we learn from history, we learn from textbook. This is how our human life improved, especially for engineering. China invented gunpowder thousands years age. So you can say all the armmo in the world is copyed from china? or Do you need the reinvent other stuff other than gunpowder? otherwise that will be called pathetic copies ?

That's basic Simply logic and make it clear reverse engineering in modern weapon is no simple like you guys think........ As a Engineering graduate I know the best way to learn engineering is from real example and you have to pratice it by youself. Until you fully understand it then you have a real chance for invention.






[edit on 28-3-2005 by wfliu]



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 07:04 PM
link   

What a load of cocksure bull$hit. It wont work with an Aussie mate so don't even try it. Some panicky cretin is bound to pick their nose, stall and end up in the middle of a burst of 20mm eventually. Its the man not the machine Westpoint.


WTF are you talking about air battles today happen Beyond Visible Range. Cannons on jets are symbolic they probably will never be used in any air battle. There are no more dogfights these days, there are only fire and forget missiles. And are you saying that Chinese pilots are better than U.S. pilots?



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 07:14 PM
link   
doubtfull... it's fair to say the U.S has the upper hand in training and equipment however the gap is not at large as you might like to believe.

And remember it's closing fast



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 10:01 PM
link   
Oh yeah its closing so fast that they take a 30 year old jet who is not a fighter reverse engineer it and make it their front line fighter. My god they are closing fast!



posted on Mar, 28 2005 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by wfliu


That's basic Simply logic and make it clear reverse engineering in modern weapon is no simple like you guys think........ As a Engineering graduate I know the best way to learn engineering is from real example and you have to pratice it by youself. Until you fully understand it then you have a real chance for invention.






[edit on 28-3-2005 by wfliu]


And what may you be an engg. grad in??
I'm one in eletronics and telecom



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23


WTF are you talking about air battles today happen Beyond Visible Range. Cannons on jets are symbolic they probably will never be used in any air battle. There are no more dogfights these days, there are only fire and forget missiles. And are you saying that Chinese pilots are better than U.S. pilots?


I am sure some are. I am also sure others aren't. And I am sure that aircraft will expend their BVR weapons and some will miss or be countered or simply in some cases the aircraft using them will be outnumbered. Sometimes you are going to have t go head to head. Anyone in any Airforce that doesn't realise this shouldn't be there.
All technology can be countered. Doesen't anyone actually try to learn the lessons in those Military history books? Do you think they are made purely for fun and book royalties?



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Oh yeah its closing so fast that they take a 30 year old jet who is not a fighter reverse engineer it and make it their front line fighter. My god they are closing fast!


Yes because the F-16 has vectored thrust... supercruise, radar reduction features and can cruise above 60,000 ft



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
4. J-8 Interceptor Fighter Aircraft
borrowed lots of designs from the Mikoyan-Gurevich Ye-152A experimental aeroplane about which the Chinese had received data in the late 1950s.


The J-8 is from the MiG-21. It is a MiG-21 tweaked to hold two engines. The later J-8II is modified to have two intakes so the nose can hold a larger radar instead of having an intake like the old MiG-21.


9. FC-1/JF-17 Multirole Fighter Aircraft
upgraded Mig-21 they try to sell to Pakistan


Incorrect. The FC-1 is derived from the Mikoyan Product-33 (aka MiG-33, but not the modern one, the old one that Mikoyan decided to scrap). China and Pakistan are co-developing this aircraft.



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 04:29 PM
link   
Ok name me on time since the 80’s where a U.S. jet has resorted to using it cannon against an enemy? Do I hear 0. Also that is why planes fly in squadrons so there are numbers. If you run out of missiles head back for more you don't keep going to try to take the other guy out with a cannon, that is stupid try hitting a jet going mach 2 with cannon, don't get jet washed!

Also are you being sarcastic about the F-16 because it has none of those features.



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 04:37 PM
link   
Guns are last resort. BVR missiles go first if you can detect enemy fighter. If you run out of BVR or if you detect enemy fighter too late and they're too close, you use dogfight missiles. If you run out of dogfight missiles and your enemy spoofed them, you have to use guns. If you try to run they shoot missile at you and you die unless you spoof the missile which is not easy with most modern missiles.



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 04:43 PM
link   
Regarding that post about F-15 vs. J-10. They are more or less equal. J-10 has the BVR advantage because it can carry R-77 Adder missiles which outrange the F-15's AIM-120 missiles by ~20km under same launch perimiters. Under dogfight conditions, I'm not too sure because not a lot of information is revealed about the J-10's manoeuvrability. However, I did hear it has a deliberate instability that maximises dogfight performance just like the F-16.



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 05:26 PM
link   
One thing I wish to add.

Ever since 1900s up to the reforms, and the 1989 Tian An Meng Square massacre, China has had many many setbacks in development. Technology lagged way behind other powers because of those setbacks.

The reason China is copying technology now is because of those technology setbacks.

Imagine trying to do a calculus problem that you've never seen and never learned about. Can you do it? Obviously not. Now, if you follow someone else's solution to a similar problem step by step, then get back to your original problem, you'll probably know how to do it unless your IQ is like 70 or 80.

This is a similar situation in China. They can't start developing brand new aircraft projects off the bat. They have little experience. The modern China really began in the 70s or 80s, before that it was more or less a third world country, invaded by foreign powers, suffered from corruption and civil war. Those aircraft designers have never designed planes before, can they suddenly come up with a fighter that can even fly? No. They had to take technology from other countries, see how they do it, learn from what they do, and THEN develop fighters indegeniously.

[edit on 29-3-2005 by Taishyou]


jra

posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Ok name me on time since the 80’s where a U.S. jet has resorted to using it cannon against an enemy? Do I hear 0.


Have there been any air to air engagements in the last 25 years? This is an honest question. I really can't think of any off hand.



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23


Also are you being sarcastic about the F-16 because it has none of those features.


You obviously don't understand sarcasm then...

The J-10 had those features... the f-16 does not.



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 05:57 PM
link   
There have been quite a few, USN V Libyan AF, Royal Navy V Argentinian AF and Navy, Iranian AF v Iraqi AF and Saudi AF V Iraqi AF are ones that spring immediately to mind, I'm sure there have been others



posted on Mar, 29 2005 @ 05:59 PM
link   
First to the guy talking about the J-10 and F-15. Those aircraft have a somewhat different mission. The J-10 is much like the F-16. an all around fighter. The F-15 would be better compared to Chinese SU-27s and the like. They are interceptors. Also, you guys do know that the F-2 was cancelled by the Japanese government right? It was just getting too expensive for its worth. They would be better off just producing some F-16s.





new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join