Actually Russia sold a pretty run-of-the-mill Su-30 to China.
Your T-50 analysis, is amateurish to say the least. But whatever helps you sleep easy at night. I guess the Indians, who have intimate access to the details of the program, have decided that billions ARe indeed in order for the program. But you clearly know better.

What a size difference.
Thanks for the link.
Nevertheless, it is completely vague on what this “participation” might entail. Likely, only monetary assistance.
Russia has “invited” Brazil as well, and well, I think its clear what such an “invitation” entails.
Looks like a fact that Russia invited China to participate in the PAKFA. It would also be a fact that China declined.
Can you back up that it is a fact that Russian invited China to be part of the PAk-FA program?
Is that why you said JH7A as the “growler equivalent?”:p
Because You hardly know a-n-y-t-h-i-n-g of value to make this comparison..
x2. But people here seem to be experts at visual analysis…or perhaps x-ray vision is a common trait.
IAF seems to be insisting on full stealth for indigenous AMCA (alongwth S Intakes), it seems slightly odd that they will invest around US$ 5-7 Billion dollars for anything less in PAKFA’s R&D.
For the 50th time. At the end of the day, when the PAK-FA enters production, if something does cause increased RCS, it will not be engine fan reflections. That much is painfully obvious.
Someone mentioned RCS reduced western weapons, as opposed to Russian. You said Chinese weapons will follow western approach as opposed to Russian.
It is called inference, sunshine.
Sorry,that was not propaganda must just some true facts. As for why T-50 is inferior. I will prove it later after I finish my lunch.
lol. Proving something is inferior from a few photos (which from the J-20s side were clearly touched up. Only in China.
Ah christ, so much BS.
I will say only this:
Late model Flankers do have RCS reduction built in, and datalink between fighters is nothing new for the Russians.
Oh and I am dying to see these “RCS reduced” Chinese external stores.
A Flanker with it’s massive RCS is almost sure to be spotted at longer ranges then any other fighter, likewise, the massive radar power output is almost sure to be detected by passive sensors at longer ranges than anything else, and according to yourself would take the first shot by this theory, and thus be at a severe disadvantage.
Oh please. Larger RCS yes, and far larger detection range than Gripen can achieve. The ball goes both ways.
only spend a fraction (1.4% of GDP, in constrast to 5% for the case of USA) on their national defence comparing to the USA, they are now able to fund basically every military projects USA could have funded and even more than that.
What nonsense. China’s nuclear submarine program isn’t anywhere near the same scope, nor is aircraft procurement, both rotary and fixed wing, nor is surface warship production…:just to list a few projects where China is far behind.
When China stops operating MiG-21 copies and T-55 knock offs, maybe we can talk.
EDIT: @ Boom, lol, you are cruel man.
I can see Loke has experience “taking” Flankers from the cockpit of a Gripen NG.
http://www.rosprom.org/news3415.html
Yantar shipyard is planning to hand over the “Ivan Gren” in 2012. The ship is 89% completed.
Uninspiring construction rate to say the least 🙁 .
http://www.rosprom.org/news3409.html
The Lead ship of the project 636 boats ordered for the RuNavy, the “Novorosiisk” will be handed over in 2013.
Much better 🙂 .
China will soon overtake the US economically? That is quite an assumption.