Key Publishing

j10fighter

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

Author

Posts
April 28, 2014 at 3:26 pm in reply to: Chinese Air Power Thread 17 #2222052

j10fighter
Participant

New videos of J-31 test flight on April 11, 2014:

November 21, 2013 at 11:50 am in reply to: Chinese Air Power Thread 17 #2251478

j10fighter
Participant

Video link

http://mil.news.sina.com.cn/2013-11-21/1435750634.html

November 21, 2013 at 11:43 am in reply to: Chinese Air Power Thread 17 #2251528

j10fighter
Participant

Link to slides

http://slide.mil.news.sina.com.cn/slide_8_193_26858.html

September 27, 2013 at 8:47 am in reply to: Chinese firm wins Turkey's missile defense system tender #1789417

j10fighter
Participant

Your source is wrong. Russian never offer S-400 to Turkey bid. Buying S-300VM will almost means Greece will also most likely how to counter your own system.

Well, the Reuters article did quote S-400 from Russia. Though I wouldn’t be surprised if non-military news agency screw up on such details :-). What’s your source?

September 27, 2013 at 7:23 am in reply to: Chinese firm wins Turkey's missile defense system tender #1789426

j10fighter
Participant

Well, Turkey still buys F-16 even though Greece uses F-16, too. However, Russia’s close ties with Greece does not help it win the Turkish bid.

My speculation is that favorable terms on technology transfer and price are the biggest factor in FD-2000 winning the bid. Turkey has strong aspiration for developing an independent arms industry with as little foreign constraints as possible. Any tech transfer from US and America would likely be limited and comes with a number of restrictions attached.

Nevertheless, this news represents a tremendous victory for Chinese arms industry. For China to win a major missile bid against US and European competitors in a NATO country is not an easy task by any means. It has to shows that FD-2000 is at least comparable to PAC-3 and S400. Even if the deal ultimately still fall through in the end (I give it 40% chance of success), it will still boost sales prospect to other potential foreign buyers.

September 27, 2013 at 5:23 am in reply to: Chinese Air Power Thread 17 #2231786

j10fighter
Participant

By the way, I don’t think the US industry will protest.

@TomcatViP, could you elaborate on why you think US won’t protest?

September 27, 2013 at 4:41 am in reply to: Chinese Air Power Thread 17 #2231795

j10fighter
Participant

http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/0…E98P19S2013092

(Reuters) – Turkey on Thursday chose a Chinese defense firm CPMIEC to co-produce a $4 billion long-range air and missile defense system, rejecting rival bids from Russian, U.S. and European firms.

The Turkish defense minister announced the decision in a statement.

Turkey, which is a member of the NATO military alliance, has no long-range missile defense system of its own, but NATO has deployed the U.S.-built Patriot air and missile defense system there since 2012.

The winning Chinese FD-2000 system beat out the U.S. Patriot, Russian S-400, and French-Italian Eurosam Samp-T to win the contract.

I’d have to say that the news is quite unexpected to me. I had always assumed that FD-2000 (and S-400 for that matter) was only included in the competition in order to drive a better bargain given threat from NATO that Chinese missiles won’t be allowed to integrate with the rest of NATO system.

My guess is that this is not a done deal yet. Surely US and European firms will mount a major media storm to try to derail this decision.

January 21, 2012 at 6:50 pm in reply to: Chinese Air Power Thread 16 #2359895

j10fighter
Participant

Of course they have not. And even if they did that does not allow someone to reverse engineer it without permission.

Do you care to cite any law for your assertion? According to this Wikipedia article on reverse engineering, “In the United States even if an artifact or process is protected by trade secrets, reverse-engineering the artifact or process is often lawful as long as it is obtained legitimately” (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_engineering#Legality).

In this particular case, this is unlikely to even be “reverse engineering” since China likely never obtained Predator to “reverse engineer” with.

Legality aside, I don’t think there is anything for China to be ashamed of. A country’s objective should be to achieve maximum result within budget. Considering that the US outspends China ten to one on military, it makes total sense to copy successful US designs whenever it makes sense. One should note that China is also designing multiple advanced UAV with its own designs.

December 6, 2011 at 7:50 am in reply to: Iran army shot down of a United States Drone plane RQ-170 #2309811

j10fighter
Participant

American officials confirmed RQ-170 is lost

An American drone that crashed in Iran last Thursday was on a mission for the CIA, and is now in the hands of Iran’s military, NBC News has learned.

Officials here confirm that the vehicle was a highly secret stealth drone called an RQ-170.

http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/05/9226787-drone-that-crashed-in-iran-risks-secret-us-technology
Author

Posts

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)