Whats the fuzz:confused:
You two are basicly argueing about the same points..

There is no secret in those Su-27 lisence kit contracted between Sukhoi and SAC.
Where it did go wrong, was when SAC started a similar program(J-11A), outside the written 200 kit Su-27SK(later SKM) contract.
SAC used much of the later Russian upgraded radars/avionics in their upgraded J-11A.
So infact, at that time China(SAC) had one foot in each camp..

Edit: I forgot to mention about the AL-31F engine..
As aviation history clearly shows, SAC were expirienced a lot of trouble with their own WS-10 engines, were they numerous times had to go back and use the imported AL-31F engines from Russia.
This was reported when the J-11A program was at an advanced stage.
Where the SAC faced problem with their engines i do not know, only that they proved unreliable..

“Even if the Su-27 deal in itself was a great opportunity to improve PLAAF capabilities, much more significant was the conclusion of a $1.2 billion contract covering license production of 200 Su-27SKs under the Chinese designation J-11(a designation previosly allocated to a lightweight fighter program) by SAC.

Negotiated in 1995 and finalized by the end of 1996, the contract included a ‘domestic use only’ clause, strictly forbidding future export.
It was agreed to begin with Chinese assembly of Russian built Kits and laterto continue production with an increasing proportion of indigenous components, finally leading to full production in China.

The first two J-11 were completed in December 1998 but these, and most of the first production block, reportedly suffered severe deficiencies, in term of build quality and required a complete rework by Russian technicians.
License production was a steep learning curve, but by late 2002 the planned production rate had been acheived.
It was confirmed that about 48 aircraft had been assembled by 2002, and by 2003 the projected production rate of 15-20 had been reached. By mid-2004 a total of 95 kits had been delivered by KnAAPO in Russia, with about 60-70% of components manufacture in China.

Local manufacture specifically excluded the Russian AL-31F turbofan engine, for which Russia denied China a producion license.

In the meantime, the performance and aviation fit of the J-11 became the main reason for the current dispute between the Chinese manufactors and Russian designer(Sukhoi).
The Chinese made repeated demands for Sukhoi to upgrade the J-11 with improved avionics and weapons systems. It seems Russia initially denied this request, or at least demanded additional consultation over cost. As results, in late 2000, SAC announced that not all the 200 license-nuilt Su-27s might be built from kits, prompting speculation that SAC production might shift to an upgraded multi-role version afterabout the 100th J-11.
Another hint of an ‘indigenous’ J-11 was a mock-up presented in 2002 loaded with Kh-31P anti-radar missiles and R-77AAMs at first, and later shown with PL-12AAMs and YJ-83 ace missiles.

It seems that China pursued with a twin-track apporoach by requesting and partially funding a Russian upgrade program- sometimes referred to as the Su-27SKM- as well as developing a genuine Chinese ‘Flanker’.

The main reason for the upgrade was the dated avionics associated with the original N001 radar. As first step, the J-11s N001 was replaced by or updated to N001V standard, providing improved target tracking performance.
This was further succeeded by the improved N001VE capable of engaging two targets simultaneously and employing both the extended-range R-27RE1 semi-active radar-homming AAM and the active radar-homing R-77 AAM.
Additionally, the cockpit received an upgrade including a new digital electronic flight information system(EFIS) with two, other sources state ‘four’ color multifuncion displays(MFDs). Replacing the older flight instrumentation.
This improved J-11A made its maiden flight in December 1999.

The production phase, which began in 2000 and included upgrade of older version aircraft, was concluded by the end of 2006.
By this time, around 105 J-11 and J-11A fighters had been produced in four batches.
According the Sukhoi sources, more than 60 older Su-27SKs and J-11 had been upgraded to J-11A standard by the end of 2006.”

Source: Combat Aircraft Montly
By Andreas Rupprecht

That is okay with me i do not say not to that but i ask you why them several reports and even interviews to Pogosyan say China broke the agreement?

For me it is clear looking at the Japanese F-15 license agreement, Japan did the same, first imported kits, later started local production, Japan has upgraded their F-15s too but so far the americans never said to the Japanese they broke the agreement.

Why Russia says different? in my opinion is simple
China communicated to Russia they were going to stop building Su-27s and they did not want more Al-31s, this implies that the Al-31 was a must, if China would had built 200 Su-27s, purchased 400 Al-31s and stop production of Su-27s and then updated the Su-27s with WS-10s and local subsystems then i would bet this issue of the license agreement would have not had happened

kiwinopal/Flogger/MiG-23MLD, you WILL provide sources with your statements

here is why i consider i have not broken any rule.
The underlying principle forming the basis of this forum is to further all our knowledge bases of aviation through group input. Join us with a welcome attitude and an open mind and we look forward to your input. done

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=27964
This is from the forum Rules, it says we further our knowledge as a collective effort.

having my opinion is part of that; nobody can force me as a human and member of this forum to do not have my own personal opinion, not even Deino or you, this is of course while i respect others and i am polite, something that i actually do.
People can disagree and still have a decent and polite conversation.

Now if you would say my opinion has a bias and unrespectful attitudes you would need in the case of this topic prove that the Russian Today, RIA Novosti have not said the J-11B does violate the original Su-27 license agreement.

It is possible you could saying bringing the Mexican examples into the topic are out of context or offend some members, i also brought several links where they say what is a reality. China is viewed in many aerospace circles and commercial ones with a poor and weak legislation with respect Intellectual protection, and i did offer a link where they said Mexico has achieved the status of the largest aerospace investment recipient in 2009 due to a better IP legislation than China and i can prove that Bombardier once considered both Mexico and China as possible destinations for the plant they have in Queretaro.
So what i have said has a solid base.
I have said a reality, countries do compete for aerospace investment, and that is a string major companies use to get better offers from competing nations.
Countries as well as companies face competition and are competing for sales, Mexico is in a heated competition for markets specially in the US and is in competition for US and European investment and this includes there is some economic competition between China and Mexico.

Sukhoi is the same they are trying to avoid Shengyang from selling J-11Bs which they view as an economic threat to their own sales.
Many view in Europe the airbus A-320 deal as a threat to European industry specially as the result of the MD-90 experience in China and the recent Embraer deals there.

The J-11B has brought a bad reputation to China even Russia denied the sale of Su-33s, but see that i have never said the Russians are unwilling to solve the issue peacefully.
i have said the Russians were willing to solve this problem in the best friendly and peaceful way with their Chinese counterparts

So so far i have not said things which are not true.

Once again for the last time !

GIVE ME A LINK; A SOURCE … and nothing more on text, I think we both wrote much too much (and everytime the same things) … simply a link !

Deino

You have the sources, you just simple do not care for them, you have even pogosyan saying it is an illegal copy and RT and RIA Novosty saying China communicated to russia the desire not to build more than a hundred and not needing more Al-31s and russian components on the excuse the russian components were dated.

O.k … again YOUR claim !

But all I ask for is a confirmation – and again PLEASE NOT, “the Russian said so !” … a link, a report or open source, where it is noted that they:

– only paid for the right to build it !
– have additionally to pay for each delivered Su-27 individually !

Then, we can end that debate.

Thanks in advance,
Deino

Deino be open, be open to the reality, the right to build an aircraft does not mean the license includes the materials to build the aircraft, in the case of Bombardeir in Mexico, Bombardier pays everything, because they are just building the aircraft in Mexico with only mexican labour, Shengyang was paying for the steel, titanium and other materials but you can be sure it was not included in the contract, niether Russia forced China to buy the materials from russian companies.

Shenyang paid for the right to make the Su-27 in China, only that the materials and labour was paid by the chinese.

China paid for the right to build it legally and that included blueprints, machinery and tooling.

they were allowed to build up to 200 but materials and labour was paid for by the Chinese.
China decided they were not going to build 200 but just a hundred.
but the J-11B shows that was just a ploy to make a copycat

Nearly in every point … Yes & No:

Just an attempt of comparison to the Airbus facility in China:
If Airbus delivered the blueprints, established the facilities, instructed the Chineses engenieers, received the money for that and China only produces as many aircraft as contracted (and payed for), whould You also call it a “rip-off” or “copy cat” ??

So is more or less the same with the Flanker deal if they stick to the 200 airfames.

I agree with You that with each part not of original Russian origin we depart more and more from the contract. As such the original J-11 was a legal “copy”, the J-11A with its updated cockpit and other minor systems maybe still a tolerated legal one … and the J-11B is – strictly spoken – no longer legal, but if they only build 200 airframes it would be the same as if the Airbus-facility in China would some day fit them with a Chinese powerplant.
The only one, who could complain is the powerplant deliverer … but not Airbus, who received the payment.

That’s why I still try to get an answer for the BIG, RED or whatever question:

If China paid only for the right to build them and has additionally to pay for each aircraft … then everything’s fine, You are correct and I admit, that I’m wrong.

But if the deal includes the manufacture & delivery of 200 aircraft to be made from a certain number of airframes completely built in China, then only Lylka/Saturn and the radar-manufactor could complain, since Sukhoi received its payment.
Additionally they could also use the undelivered but paid “kits” and sell them to another country. So why blame SAC !?

Hope this was clear …

O.k … then we can end this debate, if You really don’t want to answer . Sad, especially since You lost Your Your authority here to discuss. 🙁

Deino

Deino

Speculation is easy, i am not speculating but telling you what the Russians say, you contrary since you know you have no authority to say what the contract says you make up a fantasy version of that by denying what RT, Ria Novosty and even Pogosyan himself have declared.

You use the If a lot, Ria Novosti does not use the If but simply says illegal copy. Pogosyan says we are in talks with China and China broke the contract.

If the Chinese sign a contract they have to honour it, china did not do it.
The Russian components are part of the contract, a condition that was agreed by China, once China said we do not want the rest of the 200 Su-27s means China can not build them any more.
The J-11B is totally illegal to Russian eyes including Sukhoi since China declared unwillines to recieve the rest of those 200 aircraft.
For China to say the contract allows them to build J-11Bs they would need to prove it either in a binational court like Russia says they will do on the highest political level or in an international one like the WTO.

Now China only has assembly of the A-320 and builds very few components most of the aircraft is build in Europe.
Why tell me Airbus does that? well becasue any manufacturer wants to protect its share in the manufacturing process, Sukhoi forced shengyang to use russian components, that was part of the deal and when China said we do not want more, it means the J-11B is illegal by using WS-10s.

The Bombardier plant that is in Querataro, Mexico was first thought by Bombardier to be in China, but fears the Chinese would had done the same thing they the did to Sukhoi made Bombardier choose Mexico.
See this Airbus mostly does assembly of A-320s with European build parts in China, Bombardier does the entire fuselage in Mexico without fears we might make a copycat like the J-11B is.
Cessna makes a light propeller in China, Shengyang builds it, the same company that builds the J-11B, in Mexico Cessna is building too another light utility propeller aircraft, and some airframe parts for Cessna jets.

It simply means that as China develops a bad repution, most aircraft manufacturers will think what do make and what not to make in China.

Mexico of course has e less impressive aerospace capability and has more economic ties to Canada and the US. We have less intent to do illegal copies because we lose more in the long run, so Canadian investment is safer in Mexico than in China.

China builds some part of the Fuselage of the new C series but does not build the entire aircraft like Mexico does on the new Learjet 85.
Embraer also allowed China to build the ERJ-145 on similar conditions some components were to be Shipped to China from Brazil, China is demanding more stakes in the A-350 and even building the E-190 in China but any aircraft manufacturer will protect their part in the manufacturing process Russia did the same with the Al-31 on Su-27s build in China but the Russians did a mistake by not seeig China will not stick to the contract like India does on the Su-30MKI.

Embraer also is pondering to close its plant in China and the desicion will be taken in August 2010 see
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/05/18/341993/business-briefs.html
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2010/05/25/342407/chinese-govt-to-decide-on-future-for-harbin-embraer.html

But again you overtly choose to not answer the question.

Where or when did Russia specifically say that “… OK China, you can use our airframe, equip it with your systems and engines, and build it for your forces without our permission to do so…”?

Yes there are other issues between Russia and China that may require the Russians to let this issue slide. That does not take away from the obvious fact that this is theft of intellectual property that belongs to others. Whether the Russians choose to pursue it is besides the point. It is theft. And theft is dishonourable. How people cannot see this is simply beyond me.

i have never said the Russians say it is okay for China to do it, i said simply Russia will try to fix the problem peacefully, on diplomatic venues.
They will try to make better Su-27s than those made by China to remain ahead commercially, but definitively i agree it is wrong what China has Done, it is a theft if China and Russia do not solve it.
The J-11B is a copycat without the legal approval of Sukhoi and Russia.

Sorry …. maybe in Mexico You have another logic, but would it be possible just simply to answer a simple question … and no blablabla around. 😡

I know what Russian “sources” say and I know what Chinese “sources” say … I know the Russians are complaining and the Chinese are breaking copyright issues, but – again – back to the question, since You are the first one, who turns the story that way and esp. since that could give a new insight to that issue: 😮

Did China only buy the right to build the 200 Flankers under licence or did they pay for them (without engine + radar) ???

Please leave everything else aside – we both won’t reach an agreement in that issue – but I’m interested in that simple question.

I think easier I cant ask.

Deino

Relax Deino you do need to write big letters, i have answer you your question, you do not want to listen, Russia has already said simply China did not want to recieve the rest of those 200 aircraft with Russian components and China claimed the Su-27 was outdated, so they cancelled the contract.

later China build a jet with WS-10 and Chinese systems that were to be supposed to be russian radar and AL-31s, Russia complaigns why they still continue building fuselages and fit local components, the chinese claim the J-11B is Chinese and does not break any agreement, but still uses a Su-27 airframe, so Russia says that is a copycat.
China was allowed to build 200 su-27 with Russian subsystems, like Airbus has done with the Airbus 320 built in China, or Bombardier does in Mexico with the Learjet 85 where we only build the fuselage but not the jet engines niether we do the final assembly.

If you can not see that is not my fault, any manufacturer will try to remain in the assembly process so russia decided to keep the Al-31 and for that reason they did not grant the Al-31 license to force China to use Russian engines since they knew the WS-10 was not ready.

See? Nobody is going to give in to their point of view. The end of story.

we are just exchanging ideas, the reality is probably no one can stop China going to become a aviation power in military or civil aircraft, but what most companies investing in China are doing is trying to get a big share of the Chinese market without losing their IP and technological edge.
As i see, the J-11B was a tricky was from the Chinese to get the technology in the quickest way possible.

See for example this
As yet, the Airbus work at Tianjin is final stage assembly, putting together the fuselage, wings, engines, tails, noses, and doors imported from Europe. “We’re talking about 5pc to 10pc of the value added,” said Maurice Chretien, a floor manager in Tianjin.

But the picture is changing fast. Rear passenger doors and the nose landing gear for the A320 family are made in Chengdu, emergency exit doors, wing ribs and edges in Shenyang, cargo doors in Shanghai, and wing boxes and brake blades in Shaanxi.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/5700337/Airbus-rides-the-Chinese-dragon.html

In addition, over half the Airbus fleet in service worldwide has parts produced by Chinese companies with whom Airbus already enjoys strong relations:
The Chengdu Aircraft Corporation supplies the rear passenger door and parts of its nose section for the A320.

The Shenyang Aircraft Corporation produces and assembles the emergency exit doors and manufactures fixed leading edges, wing interspar ribs, cargo doors and skin plates for the A320 Family. The Xi’an Aircraft Company produces electronic bay doors for the A320 and A330/A340 Families, as well as the fixed trailing edges on wings for the A320 Family and the brake blades and medium air ducts for the A330/A340 Family

Hong Yuan Aviation Forging & Casting (HYFC) produces titanium forging parts to mount powerplants on to wings. The Guizhou Aviation Industrial Group produces maintenance jigs and tools for Airbus aircraft.
http://stagev4.airbus.com/en/worldwide/airbus_in_china.html

this examplify well what Sukhoi wanted why do you think Airbus keeps some manufacture in Europe? simple because any manufacturer does not want to lose part in the manufacturing process, the local economy will suffer, the same is with the Learjet 85 built in Mexico, we build the entire aircraft except we do not fit the engines and the final assembly is in the US.

Russia of course wanted the same keeping Lyulka in the J-11 program so the local Russian economy was still active in the Su-27 manufacturing process in China.

definitively China will built a powerful aviation and in many ways this is good since other emerging markets will benefit since most aircraft manufacturers coming to Mexico is to cheapen the prices of their products to compete with their rivals, in fact Bombardier moved to Mexico to compete with Brazil`s Embraer.

India benefited from the J-11 deal by getting the T-50 and so on.

But China has to be aware Airbus, Boeing, Sukhoi, Embraer are not investing in China to lost their place in the aviation busines, but to enlarge their profits and even building Z-10s, J-10s or C919 it won`t mean the end of Airbus, EADS or Boeing, Sukhoi or any aircraft manufacturer but just a a major commercial war between the main aircraft manufacturers.