The phantom is still a great platform even today; it’s big, which means you can easily upgrade it and it can carry a competitive payload; probably the main reason why it managed to outlive other fighters of it’s generation like the F-5E and Mig-23. Give it modern engines (F135s? :eek:), modern avionics, and ASEA and you have a poor-man’s F-15E. Have you any idea how badass that would be!?

And I never did understand why people call it ugly. I think it looks fine for a fighter; hell, I’d go out of my way and call it beautiful.

Out live the F-5 and MiG-23 wow what a fantasy the F-5 is still flown in many countries and the MiG-23 too

11.5 tons internal fuel capacity? That’s bull****. Cite sources

Sorry but the FC-1 has at least 6000 hours, while Russians never live up to their specifications by at least 25%. Actual life of AL-31F is only 750 hours, despite 1000 flight hours spec’ed.

LOL. The IPO of any Taiwan fab manufacturer is a lot LARGER than sitronics.

Sitronics is a midget compared to TSMC, which has quarterly sales of over 2.75 billion US dollars, while the entire Sitronics has annual gross revenue of 1.6 billions. That’s yearly.

In the last quarter of 2007, Sitronics lost $154 million dollars, net operating lost.

For just the final quarter of 2007, TSMC had a net income of around 30 billion NT$, which is roughly a billion dollars.

LOL. India is now considering things from Hornets to P-8s. Don’t see any new Russian deal going.

Six being delivered like what, starting in 2006? That’s like two in a year.

LOL. Mikron and Sitronics are losing money.

Lenovo has over 2000 patents.

http://www.lenovo.com/lenovo/us/en/

It makes like $13 billion in annual revenue.

Compare that to JSC’s annual revenue.

http://finance.google.com/finance?q=OTC:JSCSL

That’s like 1.6 billion.

LOL, still talking about building things with 90nm, when the Taiwanese are already planning an building fabs that will do up to 15nm.

Always talking about technology that never see the light of day, or pay up in the bank. Where are your Russian designed motherboard chipsets, sound chipsets, graphics chipsets, networking chipsets?

That’s why Sitronics is sitting on a money hole, hundreds of millions of dollars lost in 2007.

http://finance.google.com/finance?q=OTC:JSCSL

But TSMC registers

”Third quarter set a record for our business in terms of revenues and
wafer shipment, where all our three major market segments (communication,
computer, and consumer) saw double-digit growth sequentially, ” said Lora
Ho, VP and Chief Financial Officer of TSMC. “

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/10-25-2007/0004689810&EDATE=

here we see evidence the tooling used by the Chinese was not domestic with relation to its aviation tooling

China has proved able to buy [machine tools] from a variety of foreign makers in Japan and Europe. Between 1993 and 1996, fifteen large, 5-axis machine tools were purchased by Chinese end users ﾛ all fifteen were made by Western European manufacturers.

Furthermore, Shenyang Aircraft purchased twelve 5-axis machine tools [in 1997]. These machine tools came from Italian, German and French factories.20

http://www.christusrex.org/www2/china/Manufacturing/pg2.html

As you can see the J-11 is a Flanker built with western tooling

The establishment of an advanced machine tool facility presents a unique opportunity for Chinese military aerospace facilities to access advanced equipment which otherwise might be denied.

Similarly, placing these machine tools in one facility would reduce the financial outlay needed to acquire duplicate advanced machine tools for multiple military aircraft programs.

DIA . . . maintain[s] that the production capacity resulting from the McDonnell Douglas sale is above and beyond the requirement necessary for exclusive production of 20 MD-82 and 20 MD-90 McDonnell Douglas [aircraft], which is the stated end use in the export license application.

In fact, recent press reporting indicates China [the PRC] has dropped plans to build 20 MD-82s and will limit future production to just 20 MD-90

See that the experience of getting MD-82s and making the ARJ-21 is quit suspicious, similarly they also stopped the number or aircraft built from the original contract and later they did develop the ARJ-21, a same path to get a locally built MD-82 both aircraft look in fact similar like the J-11B and the Su-27

On August 9, 1994, the Defense Intelligence Agency provided a supplemental report explaining the results of its thorough assessment of the applicability of the McDonnell Douglas machine tools to three known PLA fighter aircraft programs, each of which incorporated stealth technologies. The report concluded:
http://www.house.gov/coxreport/chapfs/ch10.html

http://mil.news.sina.com.cn/s/2007-12-21/0740477629.html

http://rfspix.kit.net/

http://www.shxb.net/html/20071222/20071222_76683.shtml

And later, the Russians were surprised that the fit and finish of Chinese made J-11s were superior to their own, citing the superior machine tools the Chinese were using. Later KnAAPO wanted to upgrade their tools.

That’s only practically the same in terms of tracking ability.

The Su-35 can attack and engage up to eight targets at 400km, and fire long range missiles from the R-37 to the KS-172, basicly the same armament of the MiG-31, however the KnAAPO brochure only includes the AA-10s AA-11, AA-12.
http://www.knaapo.ru/media/News/maks2007/su35eng.swf
http://www.knaapo.ru/eng/products/military/su35_movie_tech.wbp
the J-11B is not as advanced, in fact the only reason the chinese build the J-11B is to test their own technology and try to outsmart the Russians.

The Russians already have responded, now it is only a matter to see how it is going to be solved.

This show us that the state of military electronics the Russians have is not inferior to any western country niether to China

the J-11B only can engage 4 targets simultaneously, half of what the Su-35 can and has less advanced missiles with less range and only can track 6-8 targest the Su-35 can track 30.

Also the russians report some of the radar technology China has for their fighter is based upon copied Russian designs.

The tooling has been reported as western and American so it was russian aircraft built with western tooling not Chinese tooling

Considering how absolutely low processing power the Patriot has I seriously doubt the S-400 needed anything super duper to get its job done. A graphics card from 1990 probably has as much processing power as your best air-intercept missile. Software engineering is far more difficult to perform than hardware. That and hardening the communications link from ground to missile. Those are the key technologies one protects.

And, star49, the S-300PMU-2 is a missile unlike S-400, which is a concept of mating missiles to fire control. The missiles of the “System 400”, 9M96E1 and 9M96E3, are smaller than their predecessors just like the Patriot PAC-3 was much smaller. The 9M96E1 and 9M96E2 could both be back fitted to existing tel’s and command centers with an upgrade at the command center. The S-400 command center is built on existing technologies of the S-300. The S-300 was first a fixed defense missile to replace the S-200, but its success progressed into a mobile system designed to dominate all levels of the atmosphere.

The S-4000 is the progressive step for mating a new giant SAM to the the S-400 called the 40N6. They are basically making a mobile ABM element in their air defenses by adding the 40N6. To do so requires mobile radars on such a scale as nobody has tried before; its not just one radar but the beginning of a growing network. The S-4000 is a massive defensive umbrella meant to physically move (in steps) from within the boundaries of Russia to whatever theater they wish to dominate. If it works it might just start up a new global arms race like we had in the Cold War, only this time on a much more dangerous level.

And I seriously doubt the J-11 is going to match what front-line fighters in either NATO or Warpac from the early 90’s could do. There is no way the Chinese made that quick of leap of faith inside of a decade, reverse engineering or otherwise. And if China ever tried to use the J-11 to fight Russia they’d fight that massive defense umbrella suddenly moving over their heads. The J-11 technologies simply cannot match the Russian SAM technology.

Madrat

Russia and the soviet Union had in the 1980s computer makers, there is the myth that Russia was lagging behind in computing power to the west, that is only a myth Russia had always domestic computer makers and domestic computers however the socialist system did not develop the consumer electronics to the level it could compete with the west after the collapse of the communist block.

here is an exa,ple of a Soviet computer the BK-0010 micro

Elektronika BK is a series of Soviet home computers trademarked as Elektronika that share architectural similarities with PDP-11. They are based on the К1801ВМ1 (Soviet LSI-11-compatible CPU) and were available in several different versions

http://hanzi.fellowshare.com/en/Electronics_BK-0010.htm

Вектор-06 (Vector-06)
The Vector was developed by D. Temirazov and A. Sokolov and won an award at a Radio-Exhibition in 1987. As far as I understand the various sources of information there were several versions of the Vector:
1987: Вектор-06ц (Vector-06C)
1991: Вектор-06ц.02 (Vector-06C.02)
19??: Вектор-06ц 1200 (Vector Start 1200)
199?: Вектор-06ц-a (Vector-A) [unconfirmed]
199?: Вектор Турбо+ (Vector Turbo+) [unconfirmed
http://www.homecomputer.de/pages/easteurope_ussr.html

Now western makers are taking a big chunk of the russian computer market simply because it will take some time for Russian computer makers to catch up with manufactures from Asia and the West in consumer electronics.

However in military electronics Russia is not lagging behind, the MiG-31`s radar, the HMS of the MiG-23, MiG-29 and Su-27 and the IRST system of the Su-27 and MiG-29 show they were not lagging behind because the west was not even close in 1987 to what those fighters had.

Modern Russian aircraft have electronics (avionics made in Russia) that show they are not lagging behind either.

The radar technology currently the Su-34 and Su-35BM have, are on par to western designs, GLONASS also show that Russian electronics are in a relatively good level.

Undoutedly Russia needs to invest more and absorb more technologies but in military avionicsthey are more less at the same level.

China has a relatively good advantage in supercomputer technology and consumer electronics but still China is not in a level to say they are ahead of Russia or the West, true they have achieved a modern level but in radar technology this is in part due to technology transfers and by blurring the origin of some technology they have obtained; China has copied several Russian and Israeli radars for example.

China in part has not been able to copy several technologies because they involve so much technologies in several areas and that is evident in the WS-10, the J-11B still according to Russian sources is behind the Su-35BM thanks to the Al-31 and the 117 engines , and missiles like the KS-172 and the R-37 are still ahead to any thing the Chinese can fit to their J-11B, the russian R-74 is also very advanced in the level of the Python 4, in fact China only has the J-11 and J-10 thanks to technology transfers from Russia

here is the cockpit of the Su-35BM

http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/su35bm.html

http://www.rusarmy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2780

More advanced than anything Russia can come up at the moment.

Yeah, with the Outdated equipment that they have.

They have R&D centres all over the world, not just russia idiot. Microsoft is building largest r&d outside the US in China….Yeah…Want Innovation? Hire A Chinese..Duh

The Russian technology in aviation and aerospace is ahead of China and that is not a lie.

while some say the Chinese have better tooling something that was relatively true early in the 1990s they also forget russia still holds several technologies China is still unable to have full command one is engines, the WS-10 is not even a practical engine the Chinese bought 100 Al-31s to fit to their J-10s here are the news

Recipient China

Weapon designation AL-31FN jet engines
No. ordered 100

Year(s) of deliveries 2008-2009
Contract value, mln USD 320
Notes For Chinese J-10 (Super-10) fighters

e

Major Identified Deliveries of Russian Arms in 2007

Recipient China
Weapon
designation AL- jet engines
No. ordered 180

Year of contract 2005
Year(s) of deliveries 2006-2007
Delivered in 2007
Delivered by 2008, units 140

Notes complete
Contract value – 550 mln USD. For Chinese Su-27/30 fighters previously bought in Russia

mln USD
units

http://mdb.cast.ru/mdb/4-2007/item_5/article_2/AL- jet engines

Weapon designation RD-93 jet engines
No. ordered 100
Year of contract 2005
Year(s) of deliveries 2006-2008
Delivered in 2007 mln USD 71,4 units 30
Delivered by 2008, units 60

Notes Contract value – 238 mln USD. For Chinese JF-17 Thunder (FC-1) fighters. MRO center for these engines will be built in China during 2006-2011

See the chinese still buy engines for their jets
http://mdb.cast.ru/mdb/4-2007/item_5/article_2/

No its kind of like T-90 getting a new number despite being a derivate of the T-72. Kind of like Su-30/33/35/37, even though its all just Su-27. In fact, the RuAF still officially uses the Su-27 label, and does not recognize whatever adhoc names Sukhoi makes.

Su-35 lighter than any other Flanker? Show proof of that. Show proof that it carries 11.5 tons internally. It got an opening bay like F-22?

Hard points are not hard to add upon a wing. After all, the Chinese may not have seen the logic of going to 14 points when you already have 12.

J-11B as a matter of fact, got longer airframe lifetime than Su-35 (10,000 vs. 6000 flight hours) while weighing several hundred pounds lower than an Su-27SK.

No they are all planning to go to 45nm process and as a matter of fact, already producing at 90nm. In Russia you don’t even have 120nm process. You don’t even have 300mm wafers, just 200mm wafers. You don’t even have 1%of the market.

Lenovo is the third largest customer of Intel, after HP and Dell, and HP and Dell manufacture in China, with LCDs, chips, motherboards made in China.

Stupid. That means all China airframes, using Russian engines and avionics making up the 20%. Which actually pretty much accounts for more than half the J-11s and J-11As.

Which the Chinese have the resources to accomplish, and questionable for the Russian industry.

No two are delivered. Nothing that shows your over a hundred aircraft a year.

Once again, shows nothing to prove your 100 aircraft a year.

You just don’t have the facts to back up your alleged 100 to 200 billion Russian military budget.

That is the food and energy inflation alone.

You are just in denial.

We have up to 12 or 13 J-11B in airforce colors as of February based on photographs. By now there should be a full regiment of at least 24 aircraft.

Heh, look at the P-8 deal with the US. Check the Indian thread for more. MiG-29/35 are ruled out of the MRCA program.

offcourse. If Chinese can copy the rest of world products. i am sure Russia can rewrite contracts.

Crobato i do not know what to believe in the other thread about the J-11B some one said they have only 3 prototypes can you back up picture by picture the 12-14 J-11Bs you claim that exist, because i really do not know what to believe

Also the Su-35BM can track 8 targets has thrust vectoring and supercruise the J-11B can not compete with that unless the russians sell 117s engines to them and the J-11B can be armed with ultralong range missiles like the R-37 or KS-172S-1 AAM like the Su-35BM is

G8 is not a treaty organization, and Russia is not part of the WTO. Previous to that, the US through Bush, wants Russia to be kicked out of the G8.

I would agree that Russia and China might end up with some agreement on the J-11B, either monetary compensation or moving back some of the parts loads to Russia.

What Pogyiosan is Saying is they need to stablish more detailed contract clauses, they want to work in a proactive agreement, that will eliminate ambiguities in the contract but they also say in China that they will talk with their Chinese counterparts to prevent further infringements of the original contract, they are dealing with the problem through out talks and not embargos at the moment and probably the issue will be solved however further coperation is up to a level uncertain and he did not coment its status at this moment

By the way the G-8 is enough to take action against certain problems specially of economic matter, China by it self is creating several troubles to the G-8 and therefore you can not rule out a common stand of the G-8 with respect China