And you can prove that they didn’t purchase a MiG-23 specifically for display, right?

yeah Egyptian MiG-23MS yeah for display they should buy a MiG-25 and a few more F-15 and F-16s for display purely for display i guess the USAF will give them an F-117 and the YF-22 for display yeah SOC

Just because the J-8 resembles the one of the Ye-150 series aircraft does not mean they are related. Or are we to assume that the Tu-160 is simply a B-1 derivative, or that the Tu-144 was a Concorde derivative?

Yeah yeah yeah so then becasue the chinese they do have a few MiG-23MS in the hanagar of the aircraft carrier Misk means they did not reverse engineer the MiG-23 ventral fin and inlets on the J-8II yeah yeah more denying

see this page you can see the MiG-23MS in China and the report is from China Today
http://www.chinatoday.com.cn/English/p40.htm

Ha, when challenged, Mig23 reverts to his tried and tested default postion of repeating the question to the sender regardless of its relevence, and he never seems to learn how stupid that childish tactic is no matter how many times he is proven wrong. :rolleyes:

Are you even thinking about what you are talking about? You try and prove a negative. Go on. Prove that there is no other life in the universe. That is the same as what you are asking and its a plain ******** request because it can’t be done. And what makes it worse is you know it. Or should do, since its been explained to you enough times already.

You make a claim and you back it up with evidence. How bloody hard is that to understand?

And when I have done anything of the kind. Quote me. And I dare you to ask me to prove that I didn’t say that. :rolleyes:

Where has there been any such claim made in any discussion on this forum?

Yet more plainly made up BS.

Says the troll who has spamed every Chinese related threads with ever increasinly desperate claims of Russian influence in a transparent and pathetic attempt to leech credit.

And that is relevent how? In all cases where foreign help was given, it has been clearly documented and published, unless the supply wished it not to made so, as was the case with the PL8, but then that has never been Russia’s problem so it doesn’t apply. That makes your baseless claim even less plausable.

And that is not the same thing as the Russians designing the J8 itself. Using a readily available engine is building on existing tech, not asking the engine maker to design your fighter for you.

Even more blind BS. In all cases where the J8 has adapted foreign tech to improve the design (the Mig23’s side intakes, American help in peace pearl etc), it was well documented and published. Which once again strikes a blow at your claim since there is no offical acknowledgement of tech transfer by anyone.

And every single one of those cases have been acknowledged and well disclosed. So what makes your blueprints so special? Nothing. The only one who should be embaressed is you.

It also looks like the Jager is ‘many ways’ as well, and it all means ziltch. Looks are superfical and mean little. Sums up the bulk of your posts pretty accurately as well.

The only one trying to rewrite history is you with this baseless and plainly implausable conspricy theory, that has zero historical evidence backing and flies in the face of well documented and publicised historical accounts.

That is just the latest in a very long line of such attempts by you to leech as much credit as anyone would let you from as many Chinese projects as you can get away with.

В начале 60-х годов при проектировании истребителя J-7 было решено установить на нем лицензионную копию советского двигателя Р-11Ф-300 конструктора Туманского. В Китай были поставлена техническая документация на этот двигатель, однако она имела пробела в описании некоторых частей двигателя. Инженеры Shenyang решили проблемы возникающие при производстве двигателя своими силами и к октябрю 1965 года первый WP7 был готов для проведения испытаний. После испытаний серийное производство было начато на заводах компании Liming Engine Manufacturing Corporation (LMС).

In the early 1960s in the design J-7 fighter aircraft, it was decided to install it a licensed copy of the Soviet engine R-11F-300 from the Tumansky bureaux. China recieved the technical documentation of this engine, but the documentation missed the description of some parts of the engine. Shenyang engineers solved the problems encountered in the production of the engine, and by October 1965, the first WP-7 was ready for testing. After the test series, production was launched at the company’s factories Liming Engine Manufacturing Corporation.

As you can see it is a R-11F-300 even if the Chinese engineers solved the problems was in part to the russian help training their engineers

http://www.airwar.ru/enc/engines/wp7.html

При разработке двигателя инженеры фирмы LMC использовали опыт создания двигателей семейства WP7 и конструктивные элементы советского двигателя Союз Р-13 конструктора Гаврилова.

here it says the WP-13 uses elements of the R-11 and R-13 in order to build the WP-13 by the way the R-13 is a derivative of the R-11

http://www.airwar.ru/enc/engines/wp13.html

хотя отмечалось чрезвычайно низкое качество двигателей WP-7 (такое обозначение получили в Китае советские Р-11Ф-300). Их ресурс составлял менее 100 часов.
however they mention the WP-7 was of extremely low quality due to the lack of some documentation and had a TBO of less than 100 hours

http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/j7.html

В печати описывался случай, имевший место в 1975 г., когда пара советских МиГ-23 сбила J-7, нарушивший границу. Причем утверждалось, что “китаец” упал на советской территории. here it says a chinese MiG-21 AKA J-7 was destroyed by a pair MiG-23s in 1975 near the chinese Soviet border when it violated the Soviet air space and its wreckage fell in Soviet territory

Flex, are you trying to just argue on each individual post or did you read my other posts?

1. I already said that the Mirage 2000 and Mig-27 were designed for different things. But in the end, the Mirage 2000 provided India its much needed ground attack abilities during Siachen.. something that should be the role of its MiG-27.
And yes I even mentioned the Jaguar, India has been more serious in upgrading the Jaguar’s capabilites than the MiG-27. Many countries that operated the MiG 23 already retired them, even before retiring their older technology MiG-21s. You may ask why they would do such a thing. The truth is.. swing wings are costly machines with even more maintenance needs.

2. Its convenient that you ignored countries that retired their MiG-29s. Czech Republic, Romania, Germany to name a few.

3. You mention people buy western because of politics. Well of course politics has a factor.. people buy Russian because of politics as well. Thats how the arms trade works.

4. The issue was never about the purchasing habits of what a country. Its well understood that countries have political and financial reasons as well as capability interests when making arms purchases. They have their reasons and that was not what I’m talking about.. but certain people here are trying to retort to statements I’ve never asked or made. India buys Russian and Western aircraft to diversify its sources and also, to make up bulk which is the case with cheaper Migs. That was never in question. The statement I made was that between these two, India (and a few other countries) prefer their western fighters. no more or no less. We could argue that they don’t or that they really do.. but instead the Flogger-Star49-Flex gang want to argue about things outside of this scope. you must realize that even if say India prefers its mirage 2000, they will still buy Russian for political and other reasons. so will many other countries. but of course you are intent on turning this into a fight between biased pro Russian groups here and biased pro US groups.

5. you also made a statement that most countries buy from two sources.. thats not true at all, there’s plenty of countries whose main aircraft are from one source. Korea, Japan, Turkey.. mostly American. Kazakhstan, Armenia, Syria, mostly Russian. there are few countries that operate two comparable aircraft from Russia and a western block nation.

6. ironic how u ask me to state sources when you provide none of your own.

http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=24699

MiG-29 maintenance issues
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2006/20060612/nation.htm
http://www.sci.fi/~fta/MiG-29-2b.htm (see INAF and Luftwaffe section)
RMAF maintenance issues
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P1-82628213.html
Peru’s Mig problems
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F06EFDD1E3AF932A05756C0A961958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

The MiG-27 has been upgraded

First upgraded MiG-27 successfully test-flown
Friday, April 16 2004 18:04 Hrs (IST)

Nasik: The country’s first state-of-the-art prototype of the indigenously upgraded MiG-27 has been successfully test-flown in the first exercise of its kind, Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) Chairman R Mohanty said today (April 16, 2004).

The prototype, built as part of India’s upgradation project, was test-flown successfully on March 25, he told reporters.

One of the 40 prototype scheduled to be produced by HAL was put into the skies, Mohanty said, adding it was commanded by Group Captain Mehta.

So far it has done five sorties and all were successful, he said.

The upgraded version enabling day/night vision has been refitted with state-of-the art electronic devices and avionics and its integration has been increased to improve navigational and attack capabilities, Mohanty

http://news.indiainfo.com/2004/04/16/1604mig.html

here more about the MiG-27 upgrade

Cleared in 1996, the project was to have been completed by 2001. But officials admitted it had been delayed by nearly five years because of technical, financial and bureaucratic “glitches” involving the IAF, the defence ministry, HAL and MiG.

Prototypes of the MiG-27 jets refurbished by HAL at Nashik under the supervision of the Defence Avionics and Research Establishment at Bangalore have already been certified. The first 12 upgraded ground attack fighters will be handed over to the IAF later this year.

The remaining 28 MiG-27s, HAL officials said, would be upgraded at the rate of one a month under the $133 million service life-extension programme signed in mid-2001. Over a year behind schedule, this project is due for completion by end-2008.

The MiG-27s, which are undergoing an extensive avionics retrofitting, will remain in service till 2020 and even beyond.

http://www.india-defence.com/reports-1328

What you do not mention and understand is the NATO alliance is also a club where members need to buy NATO goodies to keep the NATO`s military industrial complex alive so phasing out all the Russian equipment was a must, Poland however got all the surplus MiG-29s and bought F-16s as well.

However many developing nations still have MiG-29s and MiG-23s, the germans will also protect their defence industry and comparing a MiG-29A with a the Eurofighter was a good excuse to claim the MiG-29 was needed to be replaced by the Eurofighter made in Germany, yeah but a MiG-29OVT or the latest Su-35BM can be as capable as the Eurofighter

Also consider the MiG-23 was first flown in 1967 and the last MiG-23 was built in 1985, all the Warsaw pact did retire fighters not because the MiG-23s or Su-22 were not good simply they wanted to satisfy NATO standards and reduce spending in old fighters a few JAS-39 or F-16 were deemed a better solution

This is not a reason to say the MiG-23 was less capable than the MiG-21 or even F-4s, simply politics influenced the decision to retire the MiGs and in the case of India the MiG-29 has been upgraded and its engine the RD-33 is being built under license.

in fact another myth you want to create is besides Germany, Romania and Czech republic only Moldova has retired the MiG-29 and mostly because of Eurofighters and Gripens or because the Romania and Moldova are poverty striken eastern European nations without any real adversary however the MiG-29s of Czech and Germany were transfered to Poland where they are active and operational and the Moldavian MiG-29 are in the US some in Museums and some probably operational in adversary units, in order to avoid Moldova sold them to Iran.

Nevertheless Syria, Algeria and Cuba still fly MiG-23s and recently as 2007 at the LAVEX air show several MiG-23 flew

http://elhangardetj.blogspot.com/2007_02_01_archive.html

I have been ignoring this pointless side show in the hope that it would die away like all of Mig23’s wild flights of fantasy, but the mind really boggles at your reasoning.

The people who worked on the J8 studied in the USSR and pretty much all of their research and study material came from the USSR. That means that China has effectively the same technological (theory only) base as well as a very similar design philosophy to that of soviet designers, is it any wonder that when tasked with creating different planes with similar design targets, the two sides came up with a similar design? The matter is further compounded by the fact that both sides were trying to make a twin engined fighter based on the Mig21. There is only so many ways you can mode a single engined plane to take two engines, and far fewer design approaches that are effective and viable. Both teams ended up with a very similar design because that is the most optimal solution to the problem they were given using the technologies available to them.

There have been countless similar examples where planes designed by different teams ended up looking similar because their design teams were trying to achieve similar performance characteristics using similar tech.

What more, if you claim something happened, then the burden of proof is on you. If you cannot prove your arguement beyond reasonable doubt, then you have not proved your case. Its as simple as that. Mig23 has zero hard evidence and they only supporting material he has is the dozen a penny internet fansite that anyone could have made up.

Both you and Mig23 have not only ignored the blindingly obvious but also inverted logic itself to try and make this baseless speculation have any hint of plausability, and have put serious question marks on your competance and credibility in the process, not that Mig23 had any to being with, so no big loss for him.

Yeah and you have proven your point with evidence? have you? you do the same you rely in fantasy fan boy sites where they are embarrased of admiting any russian relation the Chinese aircraft have even denying the WP-7 is the same R-11, they call J-7 instead of MiG-21 or WP-7 instead of R-11 and they give a very long list of supposedly hypothesis to prove that there is no relation between the Chinese programs and their original Russian models, yeah yeah yeah the hard evidence is the same leve in both sides.

And later you even claim to be the expert the lectured one and even say i was trying to avoid this discussion but for the sake of the truth yeah i will give you my distorted point of view yeah yeah.

As i said to Crobato i will say to you, China has indiginized many original Russian or foreign designs and has adapted to some degree foreign technology to some of the chinese lead designs such as the JH-7 or FC-1.

The modern J-8II is a good example, it has gotten rid of the original Russian tech in later variants but still the early models did have russian designed technology built in China, nevertheless they went for different sources trying to create a design in the class of the F-4 and MiG-23, have they succeed? yes they have but it does not mean they have not adapted foreign technology and many here are traumatized by the fact Russia gave the basic technology and still has done it.

They even went to Egypt to buy a few MiG-23MS in order to modify the J-8I, they even have displayed those MiG-23s in a Chinese Museum, they got Israeli air to air missiles, Russian head seekers, Sparrows from Italy and Ukranian advice for designing jet engines, they even tried the americans to upgrade the J-8II and later the Russians once more so you like it or not China has gotten foreign tech and that is not a reason to be enbarrased it is just normal many nations do that in order to get technology transfers. and at the end we have an aircraft the J-8II that looks in many ways like the MiG-23 and Su-15, why simply because up to some level China made an original design from previous russian technology adquired legally or illegally

The Chinese designers have their merits and have their originality however getting rid of foreign input by some seudo Historians is a hideous attempt of rewriting history

talk about people using personal attacks and sly remarks when trying to “prove” their point. very mature

and to Flogger, no I’m not Golden Dragon.

Bringing in the Scorpene versus any Western aircraft is flawed. By the same people who argued that India uses MiG-27s because the Mirage 2000 is expensive, it is the same logic. Western equipment Malaysia uses is generally of better quality but Malaysia, despite its economic success, still has financial constraints and still needs to limit funding elsewhere and like it or not, the F-15 can be very expensive and it was never offered in the first place and that fact remains.

As for Chinese aircraft, the Spey is a western engine so what? there were no Russian equivalents that could fit in the JH-7 and China had to make do with what it got. Now the question is, if there was a Russian equivalent, would it have made the JH-7 better? Other aircraft such as the FC-1 and J-10 are temporarily using Russian engines not because they like it, but because there is no alternative at the moment. America and Europe wont sell its engines, but China is very close to fielding its own and replacing it and there goes Russia’s market for engines.

Even India’s own domestic LCA aircraft opted for a western engine instead of an RD-33.

As far as Poland or any other eastern European air arm goes.. note that most of them got rid of the MiG-29s quite fast. It may be manouverable, but its expensive to maintain and a real gas guzzler. The export models were also lacking. Some one pointed out that they wished they got the Gripen. Well guess what, its a western aircraft powered by western engines and western weapons (take your pick, European or American).

PS, Italy isn’t building the Yak-130.. if you actually bothered to study up on some news, they split off and made the M-346 which is lighter, faster and more fuel efficient already. the L-15 will probably be further developed than the Yak-130 at this pace. but hey, i don’t know why I’m bothering to respond to this.. the statement was air forces that operate both types tend to prefer western aircraft.. all this crap you guys are spewing out about new aircraft types and politics when that wasn’t the question.. but it seems that for some, its the only way to argue against what is the obvious.

The M-346 is only a westernized version of the Yak-130, it has been developed independently for economic reasons but still is an airplane that has the same aerodynamic configuration and origin in fact is a Yak-130, it is not a very different situation as when Northrop developed the F-18L and marketed independently its own version.

By the way China opted for the AL-31 and India does build the R-33 domestically under license, this prove you the R-33 is a good engine even the FC-1 has it.

Moscow and Washington’s competition for New Delhi’s attention extends to the defense sector. India is about to begin indigenous licensed construction of the Russian RD-33 thrust-vectoring engine, a definitive leap for Indian jet engine production (though India already produces the base R-33 engine for its existing MiG-29 fleet). The Moscow-based Chernyshev machine-building plant will supply 20 new 18,000-pound thrust RD-33 engines for trials at a cost of about $25 million. Then, under a $250 million deal with Rosobornexport and St. Petersburg-based Klimov, India’s Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (HAL) will manufacture 120 RD-33 series 3 extended life cycle jet engines. For its part, Boeing Co. made an offer Feb. 3 that involves the joint development of the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, which has not yet been sold abroad.

http://www.stratfor.com/india_aero_india_and_future_indias_defense_industry

The Spey was sold simply because it was old and for Britain sold a type of engine that basicly no one wanted to sell, even Russia in fact Russia has enough types engines to re engine the JH-7, however for the Chinese it would be foolish to replace an engine already paid with another foreign engine

For that you need no Tu-160 at all. But a cruise missile can be intercepted, too (it is actually fairly easy). And to launch from 3000km, you need to know your target in advance, and you need to know where it is in 4 hours when the missile strikes.
Reminds of the projects to change a B747 into a cruise missile platform. I guess they had reasons not to do it.

Man come on you can do better than that, a B-747 can not fly as fast as the Tu-160 and run away as fast as the Tu-160 yeah it is true its cruise speed it is not as different to a Boeing 747`s but once it wants to leave the battle zone it will go almost three times faster than the Boeing 747 a big advantage is some fighters are chasing you, besides it has a smaller RCS