Chinese junk? Latest fighter plane from People's Army ticketed for export

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 1 2013 @ 10:06 PM
link   
Wow....this thing is a POS!!! So bad the Chinese dont even want it for themselves. How do you sell something like that?

A new fighter plane built by China is drawing more snickers than raves from aviation experts, and the People's Army is now saying the jet was really ticketed for export all along.

The J-31 "Falcon Hawk," likely designed by reverse-engineering a downed U.S. stealth fighter, was supposed “to become China’s next generation of carrier-based aircraft” and take its place next to the U.S.-made F-35 Lightning II as the gold standard in air force weaponry, according to a report last month in People’s Daily. But now it looks like China, which has exactly one aircraft carrier, has scaled back the hype and will peddle the aircraft to second-tier air forces like Brazil, Pakistan and some Middle East countries.

“It’s probably likely that the technology was not originally created for export but built for their own use and it did not work out too well,” Stephen Biddle, a political science professor at George Washington University and senior defense policy fellow at the Council for Foreign Relations told FoxNews.com.



“It’s probably likely that the technology was not originally created for export but built for their own use and it did not work out too well.”

- Stephen Biddle, Senior Defense Policy Fellow, Council for Foreign Relations


Even the Chinese press has been critical of the jet, with Bejing-based Sina Military Network calling the J-15 a “flopping fish,” and claiming that the plane could not take off from a carrier with heavy ammunitions which could cripple its attack range as well as firepower.

Aviation experts say that based on the limited information publicly available of the J-31, it appears to be little more than a cheap copy of an American fighter jet.

"The J-31 is sort of a copy of the F-22, the most advanced (and troubled), U.S. multi-role fighter jet," David Cenciotti, a former pilot for the Italian Air Force who blogs at theaviationist.com, told FoxNews.com. "Same nose section, same twin tails and trapezoidal wings along with the distinctive lines of the stealth design."

But Cenciotti said the aircraft doesn’t appear to have thrust vectoring capabilities that give fighter planes superior maneuverability. He suspects it was based on American warplanes, and not just the F-117 stealth jet downed in 1999 by a Serbian anti-aircraft missile.

"Considering all the cyber attacks targeting Lockheed Martin stealth projects in the last years, one could believe Chinese hackers were able to put their hands on some useful technical drawings of the Raptor or F-35," he said.




posted on Oct, 1 2013 @ 11:00 PM
link   
The hype could also be the US trying to minimize sales because they don't want China or her customers to have it. Stealth is stealth after all is said and done. If you don't see thrust vectoring it is because the Chinese do no want you to see said ability.

Like most nations, first rate fighters are not sold to other countries.

P



posted on Oct, 1 2013 @ 11:09 PM
link   
But you could probably buy six of their jets for the price of one F35. I bet replacement parts will be cheap also. Probably a good choice for small countries.

Sure, it cannot take off from a carrier but that doesn't mean it won't work good for Brazil or another small countries air-force. They can't afford to buy overpriced Lockheed or other American made jets.
edit on 1-10-2013 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2013 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by rickymouse
 


You got it..and that's the Chinese approach to battle. They have 4:1 our population and they'll fight like it. For every Super-Golden jet we launch, it'll meet 5 of theirs in one big fur ball for everyone.

I'd never underestimate China itself. It was a major world power before Jesus Christ was born and they couldn't be bothered to notice when He was. We play checkers ..and lose as much as we win thanks to double dealing politicians. China, in my experience and reading, plays Chess. 3-D Chess...and they're grand masters at it.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 12:18 AM
link   
They are like guns that can't shoot strait and jam all the time. They would need 20 to 1 to make a difference.

Better luck next time.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 12:42 AM
link   
I wonder why no A-10s?
They are a NASTY plane,we had 2 kill a tank company the night before we took 2200 POWs.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 01:05 AM
link   
The large issue with quite a few of Chinese aircraft's are their poor engines.
Compared to US and Russian jet engines they are often perceived as unreliable, short engine life, higher fuel consumption and been heavier while offering lesser engine thrust.


China can copy aircraft's quite well, such as the Russian Su-27 which became a Shenyang J-11 however they were unable to copy the engines correctly which has crippled the aircraft's development. Aircraft's such as the Chinese J10 rely on Russian engines to operate.

While smaller countries might disregard expensive options like American fighters and to a lesser extent Russian fighters there are still cheaper alternatives such as the Mirage 2000's without buying an untested unknown aircraft.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 01:13 AM
link   
It looks pretty bad ass to me. It is not a copycat of any US design. It has two engines as opposed to the F-35. It has a stealth coating. It doesn't have all the problems that the F-35 has. They tried to do too much with the F-35. That is why it has so many problems all the time. This plane is simpler, easier to mass produce, and reliable.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Adaluncatif
It looks pretty bad ass to me. It is not a copycat of any US design. It has two engines as opposed to the F-35. It has a stealth coating. It doesn't have all the problems that the F-35 has. They tried to do too much with the F-35. That is why it has so many problems all the time. This plane is simpler, easier to mass produce, and reliable.

Also if you look at the canopy, it is obvious the pilot can see behind him. The pilot can't see behind him in the F-35.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Adaluncatif
It is not a copycat of any US design. It has two engines as opposed to the F-35. It has a stealth coating. It doesn't have all the problems that the F-35 has. They tried to do too much with the F-35. That is why it has so many problems all the time. This plane is simpler, easier to mass produce, and reliable.


China is very selective what they say about their weapons and never like exposing faults.
While it is a similar in size and potentially usable on a carrier like a f35 its design is more closer to a F22 or Russian PAK-FA. It does not to the best of my knowledge feature a Vertical Take Of/Landing Aircraft or contain advanced thrust vectoring technologies which the F35 had technical issues in.

It would be questionable to make assumptions on the planes reliability and effectiveness of stealth technologies or the aircraft as a whole as China is still very new in these technologies with many suspensions on how they exactly invented/acquired the knowledge.

Here is a picture for you gauge for yourself if you think the design has been copied!
engtechmag.files.wordpress.com...



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 01:40 AM
link   
A knockoff.

They dont want this plane in their own arsenal, why should any other Nation want it then?






posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 09:54 AM
link   
Another Chinese knock-off product. Just like the many fake copies of name brand products that can be aquired from our freinds in the East. They may look legit, may feel legit, but trust, its JUNK.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 11:05 AM
link   
The mistake everyone is making is comparing this to US or Western figthters. That is not the intent here. Most of the planet outside the west has very old aircraft inventories. If it is not obsolete aircraft donated from the West it is Chinese or Russian aircraft which also is not exaclty top of the line. So for the right price these could fill in nicely for some nations.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 11:56 AM
link   
I would take that article with a pinch of salt. It flops from discussing the J31 one minute to discussing the J-15 then back to the J-31. There is no link between the problems real/or imagined.

There is nothing really wrong with the J-15 that fitting better engines and/or giving the carrier a catapult wouldn't fix. To achieve safe takeoff without the catapult it has to have a compromised weapon load or fuel load. None of this really matters for what is essentially a training carrier.

The J-31 story seems an odd one. Its probably a tech demo that has lost out to another more secret concept the Chinese intend to field for themselves. I can imagine a lot of countries that the Russians wont sell the T-50 to would be queuing up for it (NK, Iran to name two). It appears to have escaped the authors notice that the backbone of western air power for the next couple of decades (F-35) doesn't have TVC or super-manueverability either. The B model doesn't really count, its fan & nozzle arrangement serves a specific purpose. F-35 kinematic performance is nothing to write home about, only meeting the spec because they kept relaxing the spec. The stealth is nice and the weapon system integration extremely impressive but thats about it.






edit on 2-10-2013 by justwokeup because: CORRECTED FOR ACCURRACY



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 12:07 PM
link   

princeofpeace
W
The J-31 "Falcon Hawk," likely designed by reverse-engineering a downed U.S. stealth fighter,



Huh?

Perhaps one of the more knowledgeable air heads here can verify that. I haven't heard of any stealth fighters shot down save a Nighthawk in the Balkans..... and I doubt they used any of that for the design.
edit on 2-10-2013 by pavil because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by pavil
 


Lockheed got hacked big time a few years ago and GB worth of design data for the F-35 was stolen. Its not hard to reverse engineer when you have a lot of the data points to work from.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 01:02 PM
link   
I wouldn't trust anything that came from any member of the CFR.

And like Wrabbit said, that's not how the Chinese military works.
edit on k010410bpmWed, 02 Oct 2013 13:04:35 -0500 by khimbar because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Grimpachi
They are like guns that can't shoot strait and jam all the time. They would need 20 to 1 to make a difference.

Better luck next time.


And they might well have 25.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 02:40 PM
link   

khimbar

Grimpachi
They are like guns that can't shoot strait and jam all the time. They would need 20 to 1 to make a difference.

Better luck next time.


And they might well have 25.


At that point it's no longer cost effective they would need a pilot program akin to the WW2 Japanese kamikaze.

They still have a ways to go before competing with US pilots and hardware.



posted on Oct, 2 2013 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by justwokeup
 


That would make more sense.... hadn't heard of a Raptor or JSF being shot down.

Thanks





new topics
top topics
 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join