[QUOTE=PhantomIISo apparently your opinions are what we should all be listening too here? The official denial means nothing. As others have pointed out, including you yourself, Israel gets a lot of stuff from the U.S. and if the Israeli government officially admitted they had been involved with programs like the J-10 then they would be risking an awful lot so of course they are gonig to deny it.[/QUOTE]

not meaning to be rude, but are you being dumb on purpose? :rolleyes:

what, you think that america’s intellegence agencies are all for show?

why, in the name of all that is holy would israel take such a massive gamble to transfer PROHIBITED info to china?

how much does the US give to israel in aid every year? how long would israel last as a state if the US cut it off? risking all that is worth ‘$500m’? do the maths. :rolleyes:

governments lie, so what? are we now supposed to treat every statement from every government in the world as a lie until proven otherwise? :rolleyes:

israel and china has both officially denied any Lavi tech transfer. that is a stone cold FACT, and it will remain as such until PROVEN otherwise.

As crobato has pointed out though, you can see the Israeli involvement in weapons such as PL-8 plus the various avionics he has pointed out. That article that someone else posted pointed out that Israel is China’s second largest arms supplier. Seeing as the F-35 thing has come about it’s quite clear the U.S. isn’t happy with Israeli’s arms dealing with the PRC. Denying the J-10 thing was something both countries are obviously going to do to keep the U.S. happy (the U.S. being a big trading partner with both). Clearly, in Israel’s case it hasn’t quite worked out, hence the thing about the F-35. That official denial you are harping on means nothing. Governments lie….every single government on this planet lies from time to time.

and you dont somehow see a pattern here? pyton, harpy, phalcon…these are all ACKNOWLEDGED projects. go back and read that article again, the whole reason that israel is in such much trouble is because they didnt TELL the US that they were going to upgrade china’s harpies.

the reason the phalcon deal fell through was because the US did not approve of its sale when israel ask for permission to sell it. israel only sells what the US clears it to sell.

if the US is coming down so hard on israel over a few israeli circurt boards, how do you think they would react to israel selling american F16 tech in the form of the Lavi? :rolleyes:

governments lie, but they only do it some of the time, and even then they only do it for a reason, and there is no way anyone not completely deluded will believe that the israeli government would be so suicidally reckless, greedy and short sighted to offer for export items that have been clearly prohibited by the US.

there is a term used to describe what you are doing, and it is called: trying too hard.

You’re asking that in relation to the J-10 project….apparently it stretches a bit farther than that, and I hardly thing it’s a “few dollars”. With all of the Israeli technology in the PRC, I’d say that’s a rather pointless question.

everything israel sells to china has been cleared by the US. its all out in the open genious. :rolleyes:

You’re not even using logic. If you weren’t so bent on “proving” that the J-10 is totally a completely a Chinese design then you would see what’s really going on.

he’s not using logic? LOL!

crobato: ‘israel will not sell Lavi tech for peanuts compared to what the US gives it for FREE every year, especially not since israel’s very survival as a nation depends on continued US support…’

not logical at all!

phantom: ‘israel will sell the Lavi tech for money (no reasoning given as to why – is israel so desperately poor that they cant wait for the next billion dollar check from uncle sam?); they dont want to upset the US, so they’ll do so in secret; and anything anyone says that doesnt fit with my view is a LIE, and goddame LIE i tell you all!!!!’

yes, very logical and convincing. :rolleyes:

Everytime I look at pictures of the J-10 I’m very confused as to how someone cannot see the similarities with the Lavi. Claim what you will, but there is certainly Israeli involvement in that airplane. To what extent I’ll never be able to say (and neither will any of you), but rest assured it’s there. You don’t have two airplanes that similar from two countries with big arms dealings between each other and not have design inputs used in the Lavi put into the J-10. If you honestly truly believe that there is no Israeli input in that design then you’re kidding yourself.

well, why dont you start a list of all the things about these two planes that are exactly the same? :rolleyes:

the second part of that paragraph tells the true story. you are so convinced of a connection long before you ever saw the J10 that all you ever see are phantom links. ironic really.

hell, if the J10 look exactly like the rafale or gripen we’d still be here having this exact same argument. :rolleyes:

Provided we are talking on confirmed sources. There is info avaliable on bits and pieces. On the contrary, can you prove its indegenious? Can you prove that CIA intel is wrong?

ha ha ha. this is getting funny now. 😀

brute + co: ‘i cant prove that the J10 is a Lavi rip off (or even present a decent argument to support that view), and i still want to argue, so i’ll ask them to prove the J10 isnt a Lavi rip-off instead. briliant!…’

using that ‘logic’, anyone can claim ludicrus things like ‘evil aliens are planning an invasion of earth’ and ‘get away’ with it cos no-one could ever prove them wrong. :rolleyes:

not only is this the oldest trick in the conspiracy theorists’ book, its also the most desperate, that is only pulled out of retirement when all other options have been depleted. :rolleyes:

since the J10 project is still classified, CAC cant release any statements claiming credit for something that officially still doesnt exist. and even if they did release such a statement, people like you still wont accept it.

the fact of the matter is that CAC cant copy their own stuff, as that would make it their own work. to prove that CAC got help, you need to find the source from which that help is supposed to have came from and provide evidence to prove the link.

no such evidence ever appeared, and there is no logical reason why it should appear.

this ‘CIA’ report, where is it? care to provide a link so that we can all have a read of it? surely you must have seen it to be waving it about like it is the holy grail of intel reports. :rolleyes:

JH-7A model???

a few plyons too many it would appear. 😀

could just be the wishful thinking of a fan, or it could be something more significant, alot more significant.

really hard to tell without knowing much more about the pic and where it was taken.

As far as I can see, the article seems to confirm that Israel was involved at the preliminary design (PD) stage, helping out with early windtunnel tests etc. Already by 1995 their involvement had been stepped down for three years.
This is precisely what I’ve always said. The Lavi connection is not at the level of blueprints but in general layout, the basics of where to put the wing, tail configuration, engine inlet location, landing gear configuration. There are many areas where the J-10 follows the Lavi layout and not, say, Eurofighter, Rafale, MFI or Gripen which are all canard deltas. There are also areas of difference; thus J-10 is by no means a “Lavi-clone” or anything. Probably no single part is common between them (outside of the avionics, at least). But it is equally clear that the Chinese sat down to work with a preliminary design that looked remarkably like a Lavi, and that Israel was involved in the early stages of the program.

We may never get official confirmation of the exact nature of Israeli input into the J-10. I don’t think Chinese people are unable to design their own aircraft; that is clearly nonsense. Designing a high performance fighter when your existing technical base is reverse-engineered MiG-21 level machines was clearly going to be a big learning experience for Chengdu and they probably needed some help in certain areas. Just like SAAB got BAe to help with the carbon-fibre wings of the Gripen (BAe having experience of this through the AV-8B program), or HAL consulted with Dassault on the LCA design. Hell, IAI got major assistance from Grumman in designing the Lavi!

well, i ‘hate’ to throw a spaner in that ‘well worked’ chain of thought of yours, but aside from the obvious verhement denals of both governments (which in good old conspiracy theory fashion, seems to be taken as yet more proof of a conspiracy), there are a number of other issues that simply cannot be explained by that theory.

1) why would CAC need israeli engineers for help in such superficial configuerational aspects? if they merely needed insparation as to what a modern high performance ac should look like, there are plenty of pictures and scale models they can have a look at for free (not that it would ever come to that of course).

the theoretical work is often the easy bit. for example, continuous curviture stealth was theoretically proven for decades before the technology arived to tranform it into reality. there were tons of paper airplanes in china that while looked very promising (and some were even fairly advanced for their time), fail in the end. and it was always china’s inability to manufacture them that proved their downfall as opposed to the designs themselves. so what was the use of the Lavi design without the material and machine tooling technology to go along with it?

more importantly, if you studied chinese aviation history, you would know that engines have been the key bottleneck until quite recently. the Lavi is just a paperweight without its american engine (and the AL31 was never an option in 85, since, ironically, the J10 was concieved to fight Mig29s and Su27s).

it is just laughable to assume that CAC would invest half an billion dollars in a design only to sit twiddling its thumbs waiting for a suitable engine to materialise (since israel couldnt share the engine tech even if it wanted to, and the WS10 – the chinese engine origally planed to power it, was nothing like the F100 engine of the Lavi).

CAC might as well have gone to paramount and bought the blueprints for the enterprise for all the good the Lavi blueprints would have been on their own.

2) if china needed help with modern ac design, why would they turn to israel – who has even less experience at it then china did?

if you are to use the argument that it was extremely unlikely for china to make something like the J10 with only experience ‘copying and modifying’ existing planes before (which anyone who knows much about the early chinese aviation industry will know to be planly wrong). then the same argument will apply to israel, even more so in fact.

this means that if we were to follow your logic about the J10, it would mean that the Lavi is in fact just an israeli modified F16 at best, and an american modified one at worst.

this is not an attemp to try and change the subject or merely trying to discredit israeli work out of spite before anyone starts. just saying that for the argument that the J10 cant be all chinese (in the airframe design at least) to stand, the same must be true of the Lavi.

the point in this being that if the Lavi was not design by israel from scratch, israel has no indigious design knowledge (of the kind that china might be interested in anyways) to share to start off with, hence no secret deal.

3) why would israel ever go along with such a deal?

the Lavi was clearly stated as a none-export plane, and that was part of the reason for its demise. its not like the python or harpy which israel can sell without too much consequence (the phalcon and harpy deals shows even such wholely israeli systems are not risk/hassle free to sell). so what in the world would convince israel to risk loosing the countless billions of american aid, and more importantly, american protection just for ‘$500m’?

doesnt really fot with common sense does it?

so, in the end, china has little reason to be interested in the limited help israel has to offer (especially not for half a billion, in yesterday’s dollars i might add), and israel has no reason to offer it in the first place.

for people to suggest that israel has helped in the J10 project is totally believable, but this help would only be likely in the feilds of radars/avionics and composite materials, not aircraft design.

the redesign of the J10 might have been as a result of a number of factors. but the most likely ones would have been the aquisition of the Su27. not only is this one of the planes the J10 was originally designed to counter (hence a plane design with fighting it in mind might not be such a good idea now), it also represented a qantum leap in capacity over anything else the PLAAF has ever had, and naturally, they would not want their future indiginous fighter (ie what well make up the bulk of their uture fleet) to be too far behind it. the aquisition of the flanker would have also have bought the PLAAF extra time to work on the J10, since their immediate need to counter taiwan’s F16s and M2ks have been met to a certain degree already.

flight international have been pretty specific about other things and been wrong about them. with the Zhuks for the J10 being one relevent example.

unless flight international has some highly classified reports that it has hidden for 10 years, that report is just old guess work that has been proven to be wrong with the test of time. just have a look at the CG model. that is what the americans think the plane would look like if it was based on tha Lavi, and look at the real thing.

we have been through all this countless times before, and besides a superfical resemblence and conspiracy theories, the pro-lavi link side has NEVER been able to provide any sort of reliable and credible evidence to suport their claims.

hell, they conspiracy theories dont even stand up to the test of logic and reason, and falls apart as soon as one examines it properly.

let it be either a testing site or a production site.

but it looks some mediavel european site for making CATIPULT.

😮 😮 😮 😮 😮

come on, no need to be so dramatic. if you’ve seen the inside of research institutes (at least engineering related as is the case here) you’d konw that that is not a very uncharateristic picture, be it chinese or western, or british to be exact since i cant speak for places i havent seen first hand (although video from documentries seem to suggest that even factories where LGBs and satelite guided bombs are made are not so much better in the US).

this is either a test area or the development zone. so all the delicate electronics would have been in their usage states (hence no need for super cleaniness). and since we are talking about feild deployable weapons here, a little dust here and there will not make any difference or the thing is not design right to begin with.

also, if you are an engineer working very long hours to meet tight scheduals (as is almost always the case in such matters), the tidiness of the work area will inevitably slip (to within a certain degree of course) and neatness comes a distant second to practicality (hence all the cables running everywhere).

with sensitive military projects such as this, the situation is often confounded by the fact that there are often no dedicated cleaning staff for obvious reasons.

i think you might be getting yourself mixed up about the differing standards between research/testing area and assembly/production lines, and maybe also about the required level of cleaniness between different feilds (heavy engineering as the case here, verses electronics for example).

The problem with Xinhua is that it is the CCP’s official mouthpiece. So they’re only going to tell you what they want you to hear. For example they may write articles about how “likely” it is that aircraft carriers will be built for the PLAN in the near future, despite the fact that the CMC could still be at logger-heads over just whether the PLAN should want them at all.

dont know much about xinhua do you? :rolleyes:

just because its the CCP’s mouthpiece doesnt mean everything its prints is written, edited and published by hu jin tao. it operates exactly the same as any other news network, with individual REPORTERS writing the story and drawing their own conclusions. they are only required to toe the party line on a small (and steadily declining) number of subjects. the reporters have a great deal (could be classed as ‘remarkable’ based on the level of reporting freedom some in the west thinks they have) of freedom in what they write in other topics, with previous ‘no-go’ areas like corruption and (limited) criticism of the chinese government and officals become ever more common.

your example of aircraft carriers is a good example of the diversity of oppinion within the chinese media. there are people working in the news industry that are either in favour or against carriers, and like in the west, they make out their cases in the papers.

it is not some co-ordinated effort to try and shift public oppinion (since the chinese government itself is not decided which is its best course of action to take), and it is not uncommon to find articals and commentaries in different, or even the same paper making out opposite cases. its just jurnolists using the freedoms they have to do what jurnolists are supposed to do.

but anyways, getting back on topic.

foreign military power is NOT a tabboo subject in china, and there is a great deal of fairly accurate (probably more so then many western documentries) reporting.

even if something is not given precious air-time or space in the papers, the information is still easily accessible to those that wish to learn, and there are many very detailed and accurate military mags (although there are a depressingly large number of totally unreliable military mags in china, these are run by individuals out to make a quick buck) and websites where someone living in china can find out all they want about foreign weapons systems (and those chinese systems that have been declassified).

so your orignial remark was just a cheap shot base more on your own personal preceptions and prejedouses then real facts. quit trying to wriggle your way out of it and face up to your words like a man. :rolleyes: