Yahoo25BTW, here’s an interesting quote by PAF Vice Chief in the same June AFM.
Why recycle old stuff from AFM when the new news have clearly superseded it? Now PAF is saying new avionics and radar meet the requirements which before cannot. So that is the only news of relevance.
With time things changes.
Yahoo25See What?
I’m not sure what you want to show me, but to most normal human beings, if a person says “two years ago” in year X, it usually means he is referring to the year X-2 😮
I like your 2 year logic which you keep repeating. Did they mentioned any percentage of capabilities achieved versus the year? Like 50% in 1998 and 80% in 2002. when later in 2004 they said that they are impressed and satisfied with the progress. So in 2005 it will be 100% according to specification. You have one point just repeating without having any data to backup.
Yahoo25You better see this. after 1998 sanctions they went on tour. there is no mention of 2002.
Yahoo25I cannot believe your inability to comprehend English.
1. Man gives interview in 2004
2. Man says “Two years ago”
3. Man means 2002
Comprende Amigo? 🙂
In the same interview it was mentioned they tour J-10 factory around 1997 to 1999.
Yahoo25Any report in Jane’s would be nice 😉
As I notice, Chinese haven’t been shy about advancements of late, especially with FC-1.
If they had made advancements with respect to the FC-1 avionics, I’m sure it would have come out by now, just like the loads of reports on other FC-1 components and subsystems.
So, do you have any response other than racial BS about population for which I have notified the moderators?
Any proof that China made improvements to FC-1s avionics since 2002-03?
where is the loads of reports on FC-1 from JANES?
why don’t have the latest AFM page where it is clearly mentioned that 4 BVR can simultaneously guided by Radar. It was told to the reporter by CATIC. There is no such capability sold by Russia or previously mentioned.
Yahoo25Thanks for accepting that you were wrong about the 2 year thing. At least you get it now.
Secondly, read my previous post.
Two years from which refrence point. Sanctions hit in 1998. So it is that time.
Yahoo25I know because everytime something happens, yahoos like you come and crow about it.
People have posted here claims about all sorts of “advancements” in Chinese aviation and other militray technology.
The fact is that there has been *NO* major claims of improvements in Chinese avionics for the last year or so tells me that this claim is BS.
AS to India, stop flaming or we’ll have to look at your own country’s magical abilities 😉
Because there is no major airshow concerning China.
What kind of claim your looking at? Just look the IDEAS page of current AFM where CATIC official is claiming 4 engagement with PL-12/SD-10 missile. Previously there was no claim of 4 engagement with Active BVR by China. So this is no news.
I can remind 8 times Indigenous population 10 times outside population that will deflate any of your majical abilities.
Yahoo25Crobato,
Calm down.
Everything you posted about Chinese avionics and radar tech hasn’t changed since 2002 has it?
So if PAF said in 2002-03 timeframe that the avionics they were offered for FC-1 as well as the avionics they saw for J-10 were bad, what has changed since then?
I’m not going to take a position on your claim that China’s avionics abilities underwent a sea change by 1998. But was there another generational change in 2003? That is the priod in question here.
PAF said it had some specs based on Western stuff which were not met by China in 2002-03 but met now. My theory is that there is no big difference between Chinese avionics in that timeframe and PAF just got used to accepting Chinese stuff.
Note that I’m not trashing Chinese abilities but pointing out that in that timeframe nothing has happened.
How do you know nothing has happened in 2 years? It is not India where things takes centuries to develop( why bother even developing anything)
Yahoo25LOL Man. Read the first page – Post 19
PAF AVM Lateef, in an interview to AFM in June 2004 said:
Your deliberately not posting the whole statement as it contridicts your opinion.
here is the other portion
“However, they promised to improve there technologies”.
So what is your point even in raising this issue as they have clearly stated that it meets the required specification now.
Yahoo25LOL about the timeframe. When someone says “two years ago” now in means two years before today and nothing else.
As to Russian tech. You claim that at one point Chinese avionics and radar was based on Russian stuff. You say now it is not and is based on Western stuff.
So please prove when it changed and how it changed?
from where you got two years ago statement?
I didnot say it is based on Western tech rather i said it is attaining Western Standards.
Yahoo25[QUOTE=Golden_Arrow]See this post of yours above- #80
You say:
Was that not you agreeing that Chinese stuff was based on Russia’s when PAF said it was bad?
I didnot mentioned the time frame. you put 2 years in my mouth.
Nope. The interview was in 2004. He said that 2 years ago, Chinese avionics watn’t good. Then tehy went and saw J-10’s stuff and it was still not good. The timeline is clearly in the 2002-2003 period.
The interview was in 2004 but the time frame they were quoting from mid to late 90s and the end they said they were impressed with the progress and we have avionics package on bench testing now. It is just the sequence that you try to misrepresent.
Try again.
Sure. I’ll not be surprised.
Basically, PAF wants Western stuff saying that Chinese stuff ain’t good enough. The it realizes it cannot afford it. It settles for Chinese stuff.
This is not a bad strategy given the constraints, but one finds it amusing that you guys try to spin it as saying that just because PAF bought Chinese stuff, it must mean that all of a sudden China has improved its technology.
ERIEYE simple version is not that expensive. Greek got 4 for $500M. So cost is not the issue here.
Yahoo25Cant believe people even don’t understand simple Sarcasm :rolleyes:
Yahoo25More LOL.
You agreed in your previous post that Chinese tech was based on Russian tech atleast as of two years ago. You also are on the record as saying that you think Russian stuff is crap. Finally, you claim that because PAF chief says so, “new” Chinese stuff is better than Russian stuff. So it is up to you to prove what happened in the interveing period of two years to justify your claim.
Either accept that your claim is bogus or prove it.
Secondly, J-10 was what 13 years in development around 2002. It was at that time your PAF folks saw the avionics and said that they thought it was junk.
So between then and now, some magic happened and it is now great? 😀
Explain.
i havent agreed that Chinses avionics were based on Russian ones for two years atleast. FC-1 is using PowerPC computers(according to AFM),
PAF folks saw the avionics for 1997-1999 period and with passage of time impressed with them. There is no mention of Russian by PAF anywhere. They only make comparision with West as in AFM interview they clearly stated they are evaluating ERIEYE against Chinese AWACS. So don’t be surprized on this one.
Yahoo25You never disappoint.
Just when you hit the bottom, you start digging.
Where is your proof that Chinese avionics and radar are based on Western tech? Care to prove it?
From 2 years to a few months ago, they were unacceptable to Pakistan. Now they look okay.
What changed? Care to prove it?
AS to Human Capital, you surely aren’t claiming that you have better Human Capital? 😮
BTW, Japanese technology developed over a long period and had a strong indigenous basis. They weren’t trying to clone German or American stuff. They just built better ones through new concepts in manufacturing.
Now address the question above?
IN beginining Japanese made small cars with technology mostly coming from Germany and US.
So China developed every thing in months. J-10 project is alteast 15 years old by now.
You made first claim that Chinese tech is based on Russia. You should know by now that Russia has not exported any radar with SAR resolution and 4 target engagement untill 2004(not even Su-30MK2). So how can on current AFM CATIC official can claim that SD-10 with export radar can engage 4 targets simultaneously?
does J-10 or FC-1 look like any Russian fighter?
Yahoo25I knew you’ll bring in Russia bashing somehow. 🙂
I gather you had secret access to Chinese avionics labs to know that all of a sudden China abandoned Russian based tech to move to Western tech. As plawolf himself said, China hasn’t seen Western stuff for a long time due to sanctions. There is every reason to believe that what was is continuing.
If your old girlfriend was a fat girl when you last saw her 5 years ago, you cannot just assume she’s slimmed down because her vioce sounds good today. She’s still fat until new pics come out proving otherwise.
IOW, it is you who has to prove that China somehow has changed avionics and radar tech in the last few months.
Also – “Will attain”? LOL 😀
You think “Western Standards” are one static thing and all China has to do is get there someday? And as soon as they get there, they will give it to PAF? 😀
Let’s see, you started off wanting to buy a Mercedes S-600. You just got a new job. Your local car dealer, who gives you good deals, has only used Toyotas. You initially say – “Toyota is not acceptable.” Then you go around, find that Mercedes is a bit 🙂 out of your range. The local dealer says, he’ll put alloy wheels and tinted glasses on the Toyota and all of a sudden a Toyota starts looking good.
So, did the Toyota now morph into a Merc or did your perception change? 😉
Your very long sermon is out of touch with reality. How Japanese car quality and technology surpassed everyone in very short time? Knowledge does not just flow from buying technologies(like India sorry India cannot digest and reporduce it) but also from inside human capital. when PAF chief is saying western standards so it means that thing.
Sign In
