Errr Todo. You have at any given time xx spare -31F lying around at Lohegaon. How do you determine which of these are defective?
1) Hire a chinese to smell them for defects?
2) Hire a ukeranians to smell them for defects?
3) Hire a monogolian coz the Chinese and Ukeranian have a cold?

Given what you say, these people can do a far better job than you.

Upon visual inspection these spares look fine and dandy.

Lol. What a joke. You think you can find metallurgical flaws by eyesight alone?

Upon installation they work fine and dany..and perform within operational parameters. Upon initial flight with new engines the a/c is fine and dandy. Then after say 200 hours the newly installed engine goes kaput. Now what? (please re-read Pages 4-10 or co-read it with a native english speaker for better comprehension)

You know what anyone including the Ukrainians and Mongolians would do? They would consider the entire production batch defective, ground them and began inspecting them (not with just eyes alone).

Hence the engines are NOT defective till they fail prematurely. Got it Todo?

And the Space Shuttle Challenger isn’t defective till it blows up. Eh?

Todo, you sure are not in Kansas anymore. I agree with you there were inherent defects but these were not consistenly found on all spare engines and thats why some fail and other do not. I thought i had explained this somewhere on Page 6. Oh well I am sure if you re-read it you will finally get it.

Let me repeat your sheer technical incompetence.

“Hence the engines are NOT defective till they fail prematurely.”

If you believe that, then you have no understanding of Quality Control and Quality Assurance procedures.

If a product in a specified batch showed problems, then the entire production batch is called into question.

To resolve that, you would have to take down the engines one by one, put them into spectral analysis and close inspection, samples will have to be taken, engines will have to be bench tested, befiore they are recertified. That process is meticulous and takes time.

Wow…at least now you acknowledge that India is gonna get 920 deep licensed engines. Till Page 8 you didnt even know what AWST was. Now thats progress for someone from Kanwa Kansas. WHy on earth would they have a high sparing factor for Indian MKI and not import a similar # to maintain their current operational tempo on the IAPO K and MKI. Unless you are insinuating that like the Chinese (and their SK) the Indians wont be able to put together a decent MKI or a -31FP. Thats a bit far fetched coming from ppl who cannot even maintain what they ve imported.

Here is some basic grade school math.

The 920 engines are not all for spares.

280 engines will be used on new production.

The engines are not created all in one batch but for a span of many years, ten years at least.

It is funny that you need to license an engine to make it. The Chinese has no need for that soon. They are pursuing a 13,200kg engine (considerably more powerful than an AL-31F), with at least 1500 hour MTBO, which is 50% more than an AL-31F. Unlike you, who is stuck for the next many years producing an increasingly outdated engine, the Chinese has control of their own technological destiny to push to even more powerful designs. Furthermore, they’re not limited to making 900 engines or so. They are free to make as many as they can.

Hey its not my fault that I have been harping since page 5 that there are no open source info on the -31F sparing factor but its on the ballpark of the MKI. Off course its lies and contradiction when you can barely read english and seem to bring up the same point again and again. What else would make you feel happier than your own delusions, Todo?

Do your math moron. 920 – 280 divided by the total number of planes on service divided by the number of years of production.

Whoops there goes Todo…quoting something he does not understand..AGAIN. What engineering project (a.k.a Tangents, since you really cant hold your ground on this thread anymore) are you talking about? IAF does not have to hire mongolians and ukeranians to fix their -31F. All their projects are handled by russians. What next? You will start using Pakistanis to repair your planes???

Oh, you keep forgeting how much former Soviet republics were involved in such projects.

See now you are not reading and comprehending TWO concurrently discussed issues. First you dont understand (or pretend not to understand) anything about the -31F and sparing factors. Now you seem to elegently forget that we are NOT talking about Barak…its about Barak 2 (its not gonna be called 2/LR, it has a different name but Barak 2 will certainly avoid some confusion till its official name comes out). When did I ever argue with you that Barak 1 is not point defence and a damn good one at that.

What a moron. The Barak 1 is a point defense weapon and the Barak 2 is a proposal fishing for funds, since obviously no one else in the Western world might buy it.

And regardless, both are not fleet area air defense weapons like the S-300RIF and HHQ-9.

Oh and you say that the Russians love you better when it comes to buying the better weapons? Doesn’t change one fact, that China is already building ships with the RIF-M.

What have I tried to make you think about? I know thinking is not something drones do, but then one can always try to reforms borgs (I wonder if my incisive humor is falling on deaf ears with these pakistani assisted english translations that you seem to be responding to). Oh well back to thinking: why would the ultrapragmatic IN which has experienced with the Barak and Shtil opt for $350 m codevelopment over buying the riff raff that you seem to goto town about. Unless you argue that it was only offered to the Chinese and not the Indians coz they got more money (err things like Chakra/Akula-2 etc come to mind…but dont bother be happy with your riff raff.)

What a joke. Compared to the IN, the PLAN has much deeper funds. If your IN is ultrapragmatic, why are they buying a loser of a carrier derelict? You don’t have enough ships to provide a proper battle group, your ASW got serious holes. For the cost, you can only deploy a small number of fairly short ranged but overpriced fighters. Don’t forget, that China did acquire two of carriers of the same class, studied it, evaluated their potential, and finally concluded they were better off as theme parks.

Dude this is the first time I had a forum mod give me invectives (big word from a chinese who does not seem to comprehend anything else) coz he/she/it does not comprehend whats been talked about yet seem to be an expert on “both countries”. That tells me the stds of Oracle’s AFM. I dont think there was/is anything racial.

Dude, you are so clueless. I’m not even a mod.

Its all facts: you need ukeranians and mongolians to maintain your planes and you need pakistanis (with their superior call center grade english) to help you translate and reply to stuff on the net. Off course my resoning will be circular…you really expect your translator to understand half the points I make? NOpe…thats why you should try your best to read and understand these points yourself. That would be very linear. Wot Todo?

Anyone will do better repairing planes than someone who says this

“

Hence the engines are NOT defective till they fail prematurely. “

If that is what the Russians taught you, I guess it is really better to look for someone else.

What racial blurb todo? I aint saying nothing or paying back to you after you started with all the name calling. Oh wait is this your way of a face saving way of ending this discussion? You know you dont have anything else to say. You know your observations are as valid a SinoDef Photochop, so you want to turn this into a racial discusison so that the mods will shut this down. Pretty clever todo, but I aint biting. You can continue your insecurity driven invectives.

Lol dude. Check your posts. You seem to want to act so superior, when in fact, you are falling on your face.

And once again, to demonstrate to the entire world your technical competence:

“Hence the engines are NOT defective till they fail prematurely.”

Ho ho ho.

In other words, a troubled design is not defective because it has not failed yet. Man, do you understand cause and effect? It is defects that cause premature failure.

Tell that to the pilot when his engine conks out prematurely in the middle of air:

“Hence the engines are NOT defective till they fail prematurely.”

Let us hope by God, that you DON’T WORK in a civilian airliner.

I dont think I EVER said that they have 920 engines in 2004-5. I DID say they (Su-30K) have a sparing factor similar to the MKI coz they have UMPO made engines (that includes the ones made by UMPO…DUDE why would we hold Ufa responsible, if THEY didnt make the engines that failed prematurely?? ) Do you really practice to be this idotic??? HAL is still far from making the -31FP but that DOES NOT mean that they dont maintain a sparing factor of 7 today using UMPO engines (hence the warrenty issue).

And here is the fact that you should learn.

Why do they have such a sparing factor knowing that the engines are defective huh? Nicks by the way, for whatever reason the cause, they’re are not caused by wear and tear.

Keeping defective engines as spares does not change the picture. Changing a defective engine for another defective engine does not make things right.

Just because HAL licensed 920 engines does not mean that is your sparing factor. Not by a long shot. Let’s assume you’re producing the engines for ten years, you got 92 engines per year, and 28 of those go to new build. You also have to assume you are wearing out the engines at a rate of one engine set, two engines, per 3 years.

Those engines have to be built across a length of time. Are you assuming that the 920 engines can be built in one year, and are all with you simultaneously huh? You also keep forgeting that the quantities specified are also going into new aircraft, and in that length of time, you are also wearing out older engines while building new ones.

MAKE AN ATTEMPT TO READ THE POST before fabricating a knee-jerk reply. As of now Mig-29K is equally vapouware like your S-300 RIF.

Lol. Your MiG-29K is not delivered yet. But at least it is ordered.

The S-300RIF is already bought, received and has been installed on two 051C class destroyers—PAST TENSE. The ships are already under construction in Dalian shipyards, and it appears that from the back, the radars is already fitted.

Your Barak 2 is just in a discussion stage. It’s not even in prototype stage.

Besides if the RIF was the cats meow why would the ultrapragmatic IN riff raff it in favour of the Barak 2??? You operate the current Shtils as the IN and the IN thinks its not good enough for future conflicts (the same that we are talking about where the Mig-29K will play any part against the riff raff MKK) Eh? Point to ponder (errr. that means think before replying amigo)

It’s really funny how you like to compare theoriticals with something operational. Here is how it goes.

China also has Shtils too. Does not change anything. But China knows it ain’t enough which is why they are going S-300RIF and HHQ-9, which is like a hybrid of S-300 and Patriot. Now that is true fleet area defense.

MKK (real) vs. Barak 2 (still imaginary).
= MKK wins by default.

I would’nt like to speculate the final specs of the Barak 2 (I would rather sniff that brouchure and then talk to the ppl who really matter , wait for you to say something stupid about it and THEN comment about it). Hey you wanna goto town with a 80’s Naval SAM be my guest.

Ah speculate. That’s the only thing you have for something still in the design stage. There is still a long long way to go before that even becomes operational.

The fact that Dassault use a more conventionnal configuration for the Mirage F1 proves you’re right on that I think.

The fact they put fixed stakes as canards on the Kfir and the Cheetah, already shows you something is amiss. That means the Mirage III has long and fast take off and landing speeds, which means you’re not getting enough lift and pitch at low speeds even from a large wing area. Again, that is classic delta behavior. Another clue is the US dumping pure deltas early, while the Russians went to a compromise—delta with elevators—on the MiG-21, then later dumped the configuration as well.

But after going to sweep wing and VG layouts (Mirage F1, Tornado), Europeans went back to the delta wing, this time with canards (Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen). Apparently these disadvantages, will still present, can be minimized (not eliminated but minimized) through various devices as mentioned before. They also apparently viewed that the main advantages of a delta still outweighed its disadvantages. In fact I think deltas may be on the way back.

The reason for this is obviously the layout is most efficient at high speeds, and air combat is gravitating back to the high speed, slash and dash kind of style. Things are changing because of efficient short range missiles with high off boresights, tracking and helmet sighting systems, as well as effective medium range BVR AAMs. No matter how well you maneuver, if you’re slow, you’re dead. If you are in a delta wing fighter, you’re going to bleed energy faster and handle sluggishly the slower you get, so in effect you’re always keeping your speed up and high, avoid sustained turning except at high speeds, and try to nail your opponent with one or two passes then break away. These tactics are going to be more appropriate in the light of more advanced missile developments.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/j-8.htm

At least, when people do not have the first Chinese prototype from the 60s in mind, but the reworked ones are of later heritage. It is out of question, that the Ye-152A and the T-5 “influenced” that first design of the 60s, which had to fullfill a similar mission. The later examples just shared the same engine at best and were still without capable radar and AAMs to fullfill the intended mission. The present J-8II examples are true Chinese fighters now and no longer related to the former mission concept!

There is no change on the J-8II airframe which already took off in 1984. China and the Soviet Union are still Cold War enemies and won’t be until 1992.

In 1998, Russia provided assistance in the development of the F-8IIM prototype, but it was a completely avionics fit, using the Zhuk-8II and being able to use the Russian AAMs like the R-77, using helmet sights with R-73s. The Zhuks also integrated the use of the PL-8 and PL-5 missile. Project was nearly approved in 2001 but was cancelled in the last moment in favor of domestic radar developments. The F-8IIMs may have been used as a test bed for 3 Zhuk-M radars that were imported by China. The Zhuks are multimode multirole radars quite capable of PGM support, so this development moved the plane from dedicated interceptor to more versatile roles.

Prior to that in 1995, China was testing the J-8C version which also never came into service but led to the J-8D model. The J-8C uses the Israeli ELTA 2034 radar which is a variant of the 2035 used on the Lavi. Said plane later tested the Type 1471 radar that subsequently equipped later J-8II variants.

The latest J-8IIs have clearly moved away from the pure supersonic interceptor role as stated, even though the F-8IIM model was not adopted. The so called J-8H is said to have SEAD/DEAD roles with YJ-91 ARMs (Kh-31P copy).

Still there is no change in the basic airframe other than a slight beefing of the structure to handle greater payload. All the personality changes have remained purely avionics.

There was only one significant change on the J-8II. The J-8II ACT combined active canards and FBW and it may have been a precursor to the extinct rumored J-8III project, but it may also have been just a testbed for J-10 systems.

The Russians were never involved in any upgrade of the J-8I. This was changed to the J-8E, which adopted an improved radar version from the J-7D, and was capable of firing the PL-8 missile. I am not sure what is the relationship of the J-7D’s radar, the JL-7A, to the MiG-21MF’s radar, which the Chinese obtained a few examples of MiG-21MF from the Egyptians. But there was surely some Israeli input in the design of that radar to enable it to use the PL-8.

Sorry i did not know all the ones you mention besides the Balzac, any way from my point of view the Mirage III derivatives and in general it`s aerodynamic configuration it is a superb one better than those of the MiG-23 or F-4 thanks to the incredible growth potential it had.

On the contrary in my opinion I feel the MiG-23 and the F-4 has a better aerodynamic configuration than the Mirage III. There is a pretty darn good reason why every other country other than France dumped the tail less pure delta design pretty quick, went swept wing (F-4), or tailed delta (MiG-21). Deltas are very efficient in moving at high speeds, but really proves to be a drag at slow speeds and tend to bleed speed quickly in turns. An F-4 or MiG-23 will will probably have better sustained turning than a Mirage III or any derivative. Deltas also tend to have high landing and take off speeds. Its design configuration is really in need of aids like fixed or variable canards, stakes, wing crank, variable camber from adjustable leading edge slats, double elevons and so on.

The pluses of deltas is being efficient at high speeds, gives you a large wing area for low wing loading, its ability to store lots of fuel in the wings giving you good range for a plane of its weight, and it produces a light but very tough and sturdy airframe right to the wing tip. The last part makes these planes simple but durable workhorses.

I have no doubt that the likes of the song and yuan would be crammed with the latest toys china has at its disposal, just look at the CCTV pictures of the interiors of recently commissioned chinese warships.

it is possible for china to ship lith-ion batteries to the russian shipyard to be fitted onto their new build kilos if the russians cant make the lith-ion themselves, but i doubt that that can happen for a number of reasons. if the kilos dont have lith-ion, it will probably be added in the next major refit because its just not worth the cost and trouble to rip a brand new boat to add new batteries. lith-ion would be a major improvement, but the kilo will manage sufficently well without it for the time being.

It is possible that the Russians would have procured such batteries from China if not from some other source through seperate contracts. It is not like China would supply the batteries to the Russians directly and be installed on the Kilos.

The Russians would have to make a seperate deal to obtain such batteries from China or somewhere else, install them on the Kilos then charge the cost of the batteries back to the customer.

Example. Russia does not make LCDs but they fit them into the MFDs for the modern planes they export such as the MKKs. Obviously these LCDs are imported from somewhere else.

Ity should be remembered that unlike most countries (who want the lowest possible unit price) Japan has been willing to pay a hefty premium* in order to build F-4, F-15s in Japan to expand their technoligical base.

Yes but everytime they do so, they also require some tech transfer from the United States. The point remains is not about Japan being able to afford the F-22s, but is the United States willing to transfer F-22 technologies to Japan?

Like you said, they want to expand their technological base.

Unlike a lot of other countries, Japan has been in no hurry to start exporting weapons. Perhaps their economy is so good, they don’t need to.

Or is it because they are too expensive.