The answer is quite simple.. NOPE.

If Russia wont sell to China the Su-33 or Su-35BM, why the Pak-Fa then?:rolleyes:

And the for the reports of selling China the 117S engines, seriously..:confused:

I thought the reason that the Su-33 deal could not be reached was because the PRC would not purchase the aircraft in the numbers which would make it financially viable?

Are you implying the USA would not fulfill her treaty obligations by not defending Taiwan in a war with China?

The Taiwan Relations Act is not a treaty, it is an act of Congress (US law governing USA ‘s foreign policy regards to the ROC).

There used to be a Mutual Defense Treaty between the USA and the ROC up until the mid 1950s.

No. China paid for the lisence to build 200 examples. They stopped ordering kits from Russia after having received 105 kits. So, the PRC can still build the balance of 95 planes with their own parts to complete the lisence agreement.

I was in HK this spring. Yes. You can buy Kanwa’s KDR off the newstands and from bookstores over there.
There is a model store in Sham Shui Po called Concord Hobby Shop at 331 Lai Chi Kok Road, ground floor at intersection of Kweilin Street which sells back issues of KDR. I chatted a bit with the store proprieter who seems to be the local distributor for KDR. According to him Pinkov has a Japanese wife.

I find KDR’s english translations very “awkward”. For example, they translate tank tracks as “creepers”.

Concord also sells Taiwanese Chinese language defense magazines
Defence International (http://www.diic.com.tw) and Defense Technology Monthly (http://www.dtmonline.com).

One thing that doesn’t seem to be mentioned/suggested in these threads.
What of the possible roles of Belorussia and Ukraine supplying Flanker components for maintenance of vanila Su-27SKs and possibly in part of the Chinese’s own upgrade package of their Flankers. Kanwa has reported before that there is quite a bit of purchases by the PRC from these 2 countries.

Mig23/Flogger/Strevitel

You seem pretty sure about the contents of the contract so this would suggest that you have a copy on hand. Please post the Sukhoi Chinese sales contract for us to see. Otherwise, please post any news article where a Sukhoi official has complained about this supposed Chinese violation of the sales contract.

Well, there is no denying that the Russians have played a role in the development of the J-10 since it uses a Russian engine.

My question again, on what expertise that the Russians have had about the Lavi program which qualified them to judge on the Lavi content in J-10 program? Can you please be specific? I think this is a valid question to ask. How can it be “wrong” to ask such a question?

Strevitel/Flogger, from this thread and various past threads on the J-10/Lavi debate you have suggested in various guises that the J-10 is a very near direct “evolution” of the failed Lavi project. You even went so far to call the J-10 a “clone” of the Lavi several times. Therein lies the point of the argument. The other board members whom you are “debating” with do not deny that the Chinese J-10 project has had foreign input. Foreign input is quite obvious since a Russian jet engine is used, especially since the powerplant was custom modified to fit only into the J-10. They are questioning the degree in which outside help played in the J-10’s development.
You haven’t been able to clearly point out where the Israeli role exists.

If Israel was truly “independent”, it would have sold the Phalcon to China regardless of US protests and threats and it would not have agreed to subject its future military sales to China to US government scrutiny and veto.

The X31 program also had the participation of the German government and the German firm MBB, so it wasn’t 100% USA program.