China States J-10C has entered service

China has stated the J-10C, the latest upgrade to the J-10 series has entered service. The avionics and the sensors were the main source of the differences between the C and previous models. The C model can also be used against maritime targets.

The J-10, as people may recall, probably has a nontrivial amount of Israeli Lavi in its DNA. It's one of the reasons I'm not so pro Israeli as I used to be. But only one of them. A wiser man than I pointed out the Israelis are really on their own side, not the American one. Anyways, I am digressing.

It would be interesting to see if the Chinese have modified the nozzle or not on the C vs the previous models. There was a 3d thrust vectoring version being tested on a J-10...

www.xinhuanet.com...

I do like the design though. It's a nice little jet.

a reply to: Zaphod58

She is a nifty bird. Her origin story is the only problem I have with it. They'd be significantly behind without the help from a certain state.

a reply to: anzha

Oh good god yes. That's what turned me somewhat away from Israel too. Much respect for their military, zero respect for some of the decisions they've made to screw everyone that wants to be their friends.

For one thing, France has never been Israel's friend, banning imports from Israel, actively helping the nazi's ship french Jews east. British 'labour' party anti semetic.
Nearly every European country, at one time or another has had a Jew pogrom.
Europe if filling up with a 'religion' that hates Jews.

Coming soon to a Wal-Mart near you.

originally posted by: pikestaff
For one thing, France has never been Israel's friend, banning imports from Israel, actively helping the nazi's ship french Jews east. British 'labour' party anti semetic.

France partially helped creating Israel's nuclear plant. Just saying.
Also an interesting read about the IAI-Lavi and the J10

a reply to: anzha

The jet looks like a mix of a F-16 and Typhoon. I have not actually heard of this one but man that things looks awesome.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: anzha

The jet looks like a mix of a F-16 and Typhoon. I have not actually heard of this one but man that things looks awesome.

I was thinking the same thing. I wonder if it's fly-by-wire like the F-16?

originally posted by: KnightFire
I wonder if it's fly-by-wire like the F-16?

It is indeed.
2nd.

a reply to: Allaroundyou

Looks more like this guy:







That's the Lavi and why Zaph and I are less than fond of a certain country's antics.

It's pretty well-known that IAI sold their data (and rumours maybe a prototype) to the Chinese. What they couldn't get there and from Grumman after Tiananmen Square, they accomplished by simply head-hunting for all those engineers who bounced between Israel and South Africa in those days. They also have their own teams and people, who are often quite bright. So it's not exactly fair to say they copied the Lavi or that Israel handed it over to be copied. Every design firm in the world had a close-coupled canard worked up to some degree. And for the program development costs they could have bought/licensed oodles of MiGs or Sukhois and been operational quicker. Not exactly end of the world.

Surprised that this and the JF-17 haven't caught on in the export market. 80%+ of the capability of most 4 gen aircraft for half the cost. Should be attractive to a lot of countries. Hell, think of the money to be saved if they partnered with someone for the TX comp.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: anzha

Oh good god yes. That's what turned me somewhat away from Israel too. Much respect for their military, zero respect for some of the decisions they've made to screw everyone that wants to be their friends.

The US isnt entirely innocent in this affair, the project was cancelled in no small part due to US pressure in the first place.
articles.latimes.com...

Also: Its simply not known what technology was transfered. the Lavi had its fair share of indigenous Israeli tech, its entirely possible that no oh so precious US secrets - its not like the Chinese cant get Information on a glorified F-16 from a dozen other sources - were given away. At least technically.
Israel has actually proven quite reliable not to export technology blocked by the US. A number of lucrative arms deals have fallen through because of that.
On the other hand they have little to no qualms selling their tech to anyone who pays them.
So in a way the US walked right into that one. They should have allowed the project to continue and they would have been in a good position to block cooperation with the Chinese.

The real question is why they did it though. As it is again showcased in the thread, that little stunt cost them a lot of good will. Did they simply not care? Was it payback? Was there more going on? I'd rule out cooperate greed, IAI is a state owned Company. I have a sneaking suspicion there is more to this affair than meets the eye.
Personally i believe this Lavi connection outrage is overblown. China has made leaps and bounds in the areospace sector and the J-10 is already dwarfed by their newer developments. They probably would have gotten here without any Israeli involvement.

a reply to: mightmight

It's less about precious American technology than it is about Israel taking funding from the US to develop something and then handing it over to a potential US rival. Israel blew trust then. And...then did it multiple times. There are multiple projects that the US has funded and cooperated on that have been shut down prior to final development. It's almost never due to budgetary reasons, despite what the public is told: most of the time Israel has been caught feeding the tech to some other country, mostly China. I've experienced this first hand on a project I was working on.

As for WHY? That's pretty clear. Israel doesn't think of itself as an American ally, like Britain or Australia or even France or Poland. It doesn't think the US will have its back for long. So it is fostering other potential patrons. Who is going to be the next big kid on the block? China. Better get started on developing the relationship. Who might be after China? India. Yup, already started. Israel believes it stands alone. And through that lens, Israel's actions make sense.

However, as an American, it also means Israel cannot really be trusted.

Now, the Chinese would have gotten there eventually anyways. However, they went from the J-8 and (cancelled) J-9, far less capable aircraft to the J-10 very quickly. While I am fully cognizant of the fact China is very capable in the technical sense - even to the point of poking those that mock China here and love to point of the laws of physics don't care what color your flag is - this connection is a little too tight and fits too well, IMNSHO.

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: mightmight

It's less about precious American technology than it is about Israel taking funding from the US to develop something and then handing it over to a potential US rival.
Israel blew trust then. And...then did it multiple times.
There are multiple projects that the US has funded and cooperated on that have been shut down prior to final development. It's almost never due to budgetary reasons, despite what the public is told: most of the time Israel has been caught feeding the tech to some other country, mostly China. I've experienced this first hand on a project I was working on.

And whos fault is that? If the US has a problem with what Israel is selling to whomever, it should take a closer look at whats being done with their money. The US is perfectly capable of blocking Israeli tech exports they have a Hand in, been done multiple times in the past as well (Phalcon AEW to name one). But turning a blind eye and throwing a fit afterwards is just dishonest.
As is condemning them for tech exports in the 80s and 90s just because the strategic Situation has changed and China is major rival these days. Prior to the Tinanmen Square massacre in 89 there were plenty of US defense companies exporting tech to China too. And it took a long time for the US to realize in the 90s that exporting tech to China might not be a good idea at all for various reasons.
So dont blame Israel for no being ahead of the curve on this and bend over backwards to appease a possible future US stance on the issue.
In fact if I'm not mistaken, it wasnt before 2003 the US formally requested to halt all military exports to China and entered a formal agreement with Israel which gives the DOD the right to review all exports.
I dont know if Israeli companies are honoring this agreement or how it works in practise, but as said, bitching about the Lavi or other stuff that happened more than twenty years ago doesnt constiute a good argument IMO.

As for WHY? That's pretty clear. Israel doesn't think of itself as an American ally, like Britain or Australia or even France or Poland. It doesn't think the US will have its back for long. So it is fostering other potential patrons. Who is going to be the next big kid on the block? China. Better get started on developing the relationship. Who might be after China? India. Yup, already started. Israel believes it stands alone. And through that lens, Israel's actions make sense.

Of course Israel views America as an ally. European nations less so in general.
But being allied doesnt mean you interests are totally aligned and you never do anything that the other side doesnt like. And its not like that this is an entirely one sided affair either. Complaining about an Israeli Radar in the J-10 or whatever is one thing, but how do you think the Israelis like the fact that the US exports billions upon billions worth of modern arms to its less than friendly neighbours?
Or what about outright blocking military operations, spying on them, vindictful prosecution of Israeli spies, meddling in their elections, trying to overthrow the current Prime Minister, financing Palestinian terrorists?
Its not an easy releationship and Israel has plenty of grievances. Everything justified? Of course not and i dont claim that for a second. But being an ally to the US doesnt mean being loyal to a fault and toe the party line under all circumstances.
In the end Israel will look out for itself and thats part of any deal made with the US or whomever.

Now, the Chinese would have gotten there eventually anyways. However, they went from the J-8 and (cancelled) J-9, far less capable aircraft to the J-10 very quickly. While I am fully cognizant of the fact China is very capable in the technical sense - even to the point of poking those that mock China here and love to point of the laws of physics don't care what color your flag is - this connection is a little too tight and fits too well, IMNSHO.

Without the J-10 they would have just licensed build more SU-27 variants and grown from there. Perfectly capable fighters in their own right. I really dont think the alleged Israeli based avionic suite or whatever is particulary relevant in the great scheme of things.

a reply to: mightmight

And whos fault is that? If the US has a problem with what Israel is selling to whomever, it should take a closer look at whats being done with their money.

And they did. And nuked those projects. The Lavi was the first time this was picked up on, at least in public. Discussion of the Lavi is FAR from dishonest when it is part and parcel of the origin of the aircraft that is the subject of the thread here.

Considering the US government provides $3.1 billion in military aid to Israel annually vs Israel's $18.6 billion defense budget, I'd think there would be a bit more consideration. But then, as I said, Israel doesn't view us an ally. It views us as a convenient patron. One that will be replaced. In time.

I dont know if Israeli companies are honoring this agreement

Based on first hand experience, no. No, they are not. But it was not the Israeli companies violating the agreement: it was the Israeli government.

Without the J-10 they would have just licensed build more SU-27 variants and grown from there. Perfectly capable fighters in their own right. I really dont think the alleged Israeli based avionic suite or whatever is particulary relevant in the great scheme of things.

And one of the great weaknesses of Russian aircraft? The avionics. The Su-27SK was the export version, t'boot, meaning what avionics it had were worse than the Russian version. Had the Israelis not been feeding that tech into China, then the Chinese would be a decade (plus or minus) behind where they are today with their avionics tech.

And avionics, as it has become more obvious from the F-35, is really, really important.

PS just curious, since it's very OT for the forum, but were you referring to Pollard for the vindictive prosecution?

Nations have no permanent friends or enemies. Only permanent interests.

China took from '88 to 2003 to deploy a design originating in the early 80's after taking tech from EVERYONE. Grumman in particular, but several others, too, were handing over tech hand over fist with the blessings of Uncle Sam until the political blowback from Tienanman hit. They were our third-side of the triangle holding back the evil Soviet-bloc WP nations. Fighting the Soviets in Africa. Menacing them in Asia. They were promising to open their markets for our goods, political reform and liberalization, anything we wanted to hear in exchange for technology transfers and hard cash.

When the wall fell, the Soviet Bloc fell apart, and Tiananmen happened all in quick order, we were left with only two-sides of a triangle standing at odds.

As for Israel, it saw the US in the late 80's/early 90's pressure it to cede land and and then open direct talks/recognition of the PLO. Then pressure to sit on the sidelines while being attacked by Iraq and threatened with chemical/biological weapons. Etc. Shamir and papa Bush didn't get along well.

The Israelis are pretty pragmatic when it comes to second tier stuff. Have cash, will sell. They sell to Russia, too. Israel, Germany, France, etc don't seem to care about US interests when selling defense, chemical, nuclear, communications technology to unfriendly countries. Bottom line. A lot of that stuff ruffles my feathers more than the sale of data to China regarding a 1980's canard design.

a reply to: anzha

It's less about precious American technology than it is about Israel taking funding from the US to develop something and then handing it over to a potential US rival. Israel blew trust then

When you understand that the USA is submissive to Israel this makes a lot more sense.

And they did. And nuked those projects. The Lavi was the first time this was picked up on, at least in public. Discussion of the Lavi is FAR from dishonest when it is part and parcel of the origin of the aircraft that is the subject of the thread here.

Considering the US government provides $3.1 billion in military aid to Israel annually vs Israel's $18.6 billion defense budget, I'd think there would be a bit more consideration. But then, as I said, Israel doesn't view us an ally. It views us as a convenient patron. One that will be replaced. In time.

There is definitely more consideration today than twenty or thirty years ago. As I already wrote, the relations between the US and China were very different back than and it took a long time for the US to see sino-israeli cooperation as more than mere nuisance. I don’t see why its fair to blame Israel for not jumping ahead of the curve while the US may not have liked it but wasn’t particularly concerned about at the time either.
Of course, if their companies still havent got the message these days, by all means, have an eye out and come down on them. Like fairly recently with the Harop drone upgrades. But still complaining about the J-10-Lavi affair from way back is just petty.

As for FMF aid for Israel. Back then in the Eighties and Nineties they got the vast majority (if not all, would have to check) of the funding because of the peace treaty with Egypt in 1979. Few people seem aware of this when complaining about US military aid to Israel, but this was actually build as a mechanism to ensure peace between Egypt and Israel. The US agreed to aid both nations with a pretty similar amount of Foreign military funding and also other economic investments. This is still relevant today, Egypt too recieves a sizeable sum each year. May look into their Chinese ties too, you don’t think they sell them everything they want? Its not just Israel, not by a long shot.

Of course Israel has managed to about double the aid since then due to pretty effective lobbying,playing to vital US interest and extensive cooperation with US defense contractors, but the point is, just because the US agreed to give them money to hold up a peace treaty doesn’t really include Israel having to ask permission to export tech gained in part by that funding. Especially not if the US isnt particularly interested in the details anyway and basically only concerned with shoveling pork to its own defense industry through FMF.

And one of the great weaknesses of Russian aircraft? The avionics. The Su-27SK was the export version, t'boot, meaning what avionics it had were worse than the Russian version. Had the Israelis not been feeding that tech into China, then the Chinese would be a decade (plus or minus) behind where they are today with their avionics tech.

Come on this is just throwing stuff upon a wall and hoping something sticks.
China has not only access to the Su-27K but also flys pretty much every other major variant that was spawned by the Su-27. Su-30MKK, Su-33, SU-35… the avionics of those aircrafts are actually at least a generation or two ahead of a prototype designed in the early eighties. The russians arent that far behind the US or the Israel.
Also again, this is all conjecture. We do not know what was or wasn’t transferred to China. And we certainly due not know how much the chinese aerospace sector profited for that or where they would be without it. Claiming 10 years advancement is pretty baseless IMO.

PS just curious, since it's very OT for the forum, but were you referring to Pollard for the vindictive prosecution?

The Richard Kelly Smyth affair wasn’t particularly stellar either but, yes, pollards life sentence ignored the plea agreement, was unwarranted and did go well beyond sentences handed down in comparable cases. The issue was blown out of proportion to make a point. As was the continued refusal of the US to release him early.