LAVI-J10 thread for Erez

right, i have gone to the trouble of creating this thread for you to play out your fantasies, and to get you started:

actually, before i start, it might be a good idea for you to seporate your replies for different people. :rolleyes:

And the Lavi was American as much as the Gripen is American. Because of your nationalistic feelings I’m sure it’s easy to you to see the Gripen as Swedish with some American systems, but when it comes to the Lavi, and its J-10 connection, you refer to it as an American plane, while in both of the planes the use of foreign designed systems was similar.

that is just crap and you know it.

the only thing the Gripen and to do with the US was its engine. everything else about the plane was swedish.

you dont seem to understand the difference between designing a plane around someone else’s engine and basing your design on someone else’s plane.

or are you to also suggest that the JH7 is british and the FC1 is russian because they were designed around foreign engines? :rolleyes:

the LAVI-F16 link is far more promonent then any LAVI-J10 link, yet you totally reject the former while being absolute sure of the latter? people have a word for that you know (actually more the one) – selective acknowledgement. :rolleyes:

the american participation in the LAVI project was concrete, and that particapation was right from the start. and when america pulled its support, th LAVI project died.

the areodynamic design between the F16 and LAVI is PROFOUND – same wing design, same fusalage design, same cockpit design (raised), same intake design, similar sized vertical stabliser, similar size…many of the parts are the same or slightly modified.

‘no link.’

there has never been any offical (or unoffical that anyone knows of) israeli involvement in the J10 project. no israeli parts for the J10.

the areodynamic designes are profoundly differnent – different intake, different canard positioning, differnet fusalage design, different cockpit design, different wing design, different vertical stabliser design and size, different nose design…the two dont even use the same engine nor do they have one nut that is of the same make.

‘obvious link’

surely not even you can be as deluded as to think that that is anyway logical.

also, its funny that you suggest that my views are somehow ‘blinded by nationalism’ without even considering what your own motives behind the J10-LAVI link might be. :rolleyes:

Remeber that GD also claimed that we don’t have experience in building aircraft. So I brought these example. At least, it seems, you acknowledge that Israel produced quite a number of airplanes so far.
The Lavi is the Israeli experience is designing our technologically succesful fighter plane. Along with the Lavi, there was the Arye, which (except concept #33) was a paper lion, but gave the IAI experience in designing local airplanes.

well it is highly debateble how much th LAVI borrowed, or benefited or whatever you prefer to call it, from F16 tech to qualify as a purely indiginous effort.

as for the Arye, please! :rolleyes: if anything it lessens your arguments about the design capabilities of IAI as no one with even th most basic design successes would point to paper airplanes as ‘evidence’ pf their capabilities. and unfortnately, not having designed a successful airplane = no independent design experience that is worth a damn.

As I already gave details before, the IAI’s transfer from the Kfir (a Mirage) to the Lavi (a new plane) was deeply routed in the Arye project. It took us over four decades of work to reach the point where we could have built our own fighter plane. While in the Chinese case, the J-10 is like a shining light in a sea of drakness – While China still produces mostly redesigns of Russian designed equipment, suddendly it came out with their own brand new 4th generation fighter plane. Personally, I don’t think it’s possible.

lol, thats just pure ignarence on your part them. :rolleyes:

china and israel actually started off on similar footings, with both having to copy and modify existing designs.

however, with china, you have the J8, J8II, J9, J10 and J11 (originals), J12, Q5, Q6, JH7 and super7 designs that came in between.

even the latter J7 redesigns are far more extensive then anything israel has accompishing, except maybe the LAVI, but you’d propable dispute that since you still think the LAVI was ‘original’.

you might point to the J8 as a modification of the J7. that might be true of the J8I, but the J8II is in all intent and purposes a newly designed plane. what it took from the J8I and J7 is not significantly more then what the designers from any nation or company take from their earlier designs.

you might also point to the Q6, J9, J10 and J11 as being failed projects. that is true, but the reason they failed is because of china’s inability to make the materials and components that would have turned them from paper planes to real planes.

the J12 actually flew, and set a couple of world records in the process (being th world’s lightest supersonic plane).

as you can see, the last thing the chinese areospace industry lacked was designs, even if it did, israel would be one of the last places they’d look. and that makes the LAVI connection all the more improbable.

think about it. if china was unable to make the parts for their much eariler (in effect, simplier) designs, what makes you think they can make the LAVI without any of the tools and materials?

it would be like giving a first world war era factory the plans for a T72. they’d know how th thing should go together, but they wont be able to make the parts to assemble.

it might have been possible had the timing been different, but at the time, china was the west’s bestest buddy. Harrier licencing was well underway and the americans were showing real interest in selling F16s.

why would china waste 1bn on an ‘over the horizen’ project when they can just buy off the shelf and get ToT to sweeten the deal?

And before GD will pop up with the J-9, I’ll say this: Yes, China had and has tonnes of experience with fighter jets, they also designed a few of their own or made real changes in the Russian designs, such as with the J-8II. They knew very well what canard delta configuration is, but from that, to reaching a fourth generation fighter plane with delta canard configuration, years after the J-9 project was stopped, and while it bears physical similarity to the Lavi, and in the background there are always reports in the international aviation industry that the Lavi tech was transfered to China – You may believe what you will, but I think that it’s just too obvious than to be a coincidence.

you yourself said that there would be major consequenses for israel if it did transfer LAVI tech and was caught by the americans.

has there been any serious consequences? hardly seems like that the US has not been able to pin israel down if the evidence is so easily and widely accessable and so damning dont you think? :rolleyes:

Correction – the technological development of the plane was completed in 1991, when the Lavi’s radar development ended. What we couldn’t afford was the serial production of the plane. Also the US made it clear it will not permit any Lavi exports, as these included American technology, so it became uneconomical.

well, once again i am just picking evidence to disprove your past claims from your own words. :rolleyes:

how could the US block LAVI exports if the plane is entirely israeli as you claim? has the US ever placed such a wholesale export ban on any other indiginous israeli project? (the Phalcon was only canceled because it was for china, the phalcon tech is still on the market and the indians seem certain to buy it).

If to follow your logic, I already proved to you that the design of the Lavi was years before we got our F-16s – and yet you and GD continue to claim it’s based over the F-16.

the F16 was in service long before israel got their F16s, and are you, someone with such a conspiricy prone mind, going to deny the possibility of israel getting F16 design data before they got their F16s? 😀

are you also going to deny the obvious and profound areodynamic similarities between the LAVI and F16, certainly far more profound then any similarities between the LAVI and J10?

to correct you, you are not following my logic, since i was merely applying the ‘logic’ you used to link the J10 with the LAVI on the LAVI and the F16.

israel has far better links to the US (both in quality and quantity) then china does with israel; the appearence of the LAVI is far more similar to the F16 compared to the J10.

also, i was merely using the ‘redesign’ theroy that you used to ‘justify’ LAVI tech influence in the J10 even though the J10 project started way before LAVI come into the picture.

then there are also the other factors of open and substantual US involvement in the LAVI project compared to zero confirmed israeli participation in the J10 project; the fact that israel bought and evaluated the F16 while china, to all available (reliable) evidence, has not even seen the LAVI ‘in the flesh’.

in china, we have an old saying, ‘zi xiang mao dun’, which literally translates as ‘your spear against your sheild’, and you are about as good an example of that as i have seen so far.

i use the exact same ‘logic’ (and back it up with more factors in fact) in drawing the F16-LAVI link as you did with the LAVI-J10, and im bullsh!ting while you expect me to beleive your original claims about the J10? please! :rolleyes:

The Lavi was not a modified F-16. Yet you still have some truth in what you say – the Lavi did included American technology that couldn’t have been transfered from Israel to China. The misssing of these technologies are the main reason for the redesign China had to put the plane through, and example for this is the engine – China had to replace the American engine of the Lavi with a russian engine (and that changed the intake and airframe).

see above in regard to american ‘retaliation’.

as for the russian engine forced re-design. well that might have made a little sense had the timing not been all wrong.

at the time of the supposed LAVI deal, china and russia (USSR) were on the wrong sides of the cold war, and seeing how the berlin wall came down so suddenly, there was no way china could have factored in the AL31NF at the time.

so, what was the chinese supposed to do for the engine? (amounst other things) you dont spend a billion dollars (and US$1bn in those days meant a hell of alot more to china then than it does now) without thinking it throw properly first.

if china wasnt even able to make the engine for the J9, what makes you think they can make the F16’s, which is far more advanced? and if china couldnt make the engine, what use was the design to begin with?

the only thing about the LAVI china might have been willing to pay a billion for was the engine tech, and maybe the electronics and matericals on the side. but none of that was on the table was it?

as for the ‘redesign’, well lets take some more of your own arguments.

the differnences between the F16 and LAVI could more then be explained away be the changing of the design to a canard.

Exactly. That’s the reason it was made under the table and with Israeli technology only. It doesn’t worth it.

so why take the risk and make the deal at all? :rolleyes:

would you be willing to mortage your house for the money to buy a TV?

and then there’s the chinese side. what was israel selling that would have been worth them paying a billion for the designs of a plane they cant build to get?

That American official was more or less an idiot, because he knew nothing about aviation. The planes that took off in the time of the Lavi were the Gripen, the Rafale and the Eurofighter. They all originated from the 80s, but are they considered old today?

so now he’s an ‘idiot’ now is he? 😀

if he is such a fool in regard to aviation, why should we treat anything else he says on the subject with any more credability?

The term “military technologies” doesn’t rule out airframe design.

doesnt implicitly imply it either.

you still dont get how things work do you? 😮

right now, we have TWO OFFICAL and SPECIFIC GOVENMENTAL statements saying the LAVI-J10 link DOES NOT EXIST.

thats the holy grail in terms of evidence, you cant get higher then that.

to disprove it, you need at least something of the same level – like a CIA report implicetly stating that LAVI tech (airframe) was transfered from israel to china, or government records from china or israel that show the transaction or photos of a LAVI with deng next to it or something like that.

nothing else comes close to disproving the government statements.

i have used your own ‘logic’ to show you that the F16-LAVI connection is more likely to be true then the LAVI-J10 link. so for your claim that the J10 is based on the LAVI to be true based on the arguments you have given, the same must also be with the F16-LAVI case. but since israel cant and wont sell american tech, the LAVI couldnt have influenced the J10 to start with.

i have also shown you why it is illogical for BOTH israel and china to have make the deal – too much to loose/pay for too little reward.

so, to sum up. not only have you not provided ANY remotely important evidence that can disprove the offical denials, the reasoning behind your speculations as to why and how the transfer of airframe tech could have happened is based on flawed and illogical information and/or biased personal opponion.

i have examined your claims throughly, dispationately and mothedically, while your responses have been increasingly illogical, personal, irrelevent and irrational.

all of that and im the one with the ‘closed mind’ who is being ‘blinded by nationalism’?

please, dont imbaress yourself further.

either make a decent attemp to present your case in a logical and persuasive manner, or stop wasting my time.