dark light

GoldenDragon

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,801 through 1,815 (of 2,918 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Pictures, news and speculation thread #2661597
    GoldenDragon
    Participant

    PS: Wait a minute Goldy?!! Flogger == strevitel??? That DOPE from CDF?? Well, that would exlain allot 😀 😀

    The bizarre repetitive nature of his posts was an instant giveaway 🙂

    in reply to: Chinese Il-76 at Zhukovsky #2662288
    GoldenDragon
    Participant

    Hangared C-5s and C-17s hangared at US airbases have their asses sticking out exactly like this Il-76.

    In the US, there is this peculiar habit of hanging one’s naked arse out car and apartment windows called “mooning.”

    in reply to: Pictures, news and speculation thread #2662307
    GoldenDragon
    Participant

    Maybe we can hear more about the K8E program and possibly the FC-1 from the Egyptian trip – there has been a lot of noise on the Chinese forums about Egypt 🙂

    The Tanzanian air force received two Y8F200s last year and it would be nice to find out their future plans.

    in reply to: Newcomer toforum #2663019
    GoldenDragon
    Participant

    Hello

    And welcome.

    If you want to post pictures and those pictures are on your hard drive, you could simply post a message and attach photos to the message.

    There is a “Manage Attachments” link at the bottom of each new messag you are posting. Unless the pictures are too big, posting them should be pretty straight forward.

    Everyone was computer illiterate at some point in time but it is easy to learn 🙂

    Best of luck.

    in reply to: Pictures, news and speculation thread #2664041
    GoldenDragon
    Participant

    About the cheaper options. Why getting extremely cheap plane (F7 bvr) and expensive BVR radar and missile? And will those nations be able to fight a real Su27 or Mig29 that are in the same arena?

    Probably not, and which is why I think the J-7MF is most likely for China alone which is looking for an extremely cheap plane with bvr (China might want to keep the J-7 components lines open for employment reasons.)

    Any nation that might ask for it, probably wouldn’t be able to afford a bvr fighter otherwise.

    A Cessna can’t go Mach 2 or carry a SD-10. It has no missile-capable pylons and where would you mount the radar? The Y12 could possibly mount a SD-10 but you need millions and years in development and testing 🙂

    in reply to: Pictures, news and speculation thread #2664069
    GoldenDragon
    Participant

    Exposing fc1 is not the problem Pretty much sure that more high tech J10 will be offered to others. The problems is that China needs to compete with EF2000, Gripen. Rafale etc. Maybe they came a long way but this field is about getting further then others. I don’t think even J10 has passed those opponents. Why bother over the low tech part of that team?

    China has no ability to compete with the EF2000 and Rafale on the export market and it is not trying and has never tried. The high end simply isn’t China’s niche market. So your statement is a bolt out of the blue.

    The J-10 as PLAWolf said isn’t up for general export. It isn’t even official yet. So we know it is not competing with anyone, much less the EF2000 and Rafale.

    If the J-7MF is really made, it probably won’t be exported while the FC-1 will be.

    Actually to think of it, the VERY cheap end for nations that could not afford even the FC-1 would be the J-7MF (if anyone can make do with something less capable.)

    in reply to: Trainer Aircraft Market Could Be Worth $42B, Study Says #2664806
    GoldenDragon
    Participant

    Actually, the Chinese fighter market would have been dominated by Western firms by now were it not for the embargo after 1989. Like every market in China, the quest is for things western.

    We see it already in the airliner and helicopter space.

    Remember, in the 1980s, China even gave up its Y10 airliner (a successful program with over 130 flights and three prototype) because its carriers want western.

    The same would have happened in the fighter’s space if the western embargo was never put into place. The embargo is actually forcing China into supporting its own projects (as well as buying Russian.) Though you won’t see China dropping a project like the XXJ like it did with the Y10 even if the embargo were dropped.

    But even with the embargo, Western aviation firms are still the greatest beneficiaries of the Chinese aviation boom (much more than Sukhoi) because the civilian side is always the bigger moneymaker.

    The airliner and helicopter markets I already mentioned but even quasi-military projects like the Y12E, Y8F600 and MA60 (Y7) are major windfalls for Western aviation companies. All three use western composite propellers and PW turbofans. (1)

    The military Y12s, Y8s and Y7s would probably use PW as powerplants too were it not for politics. But with the embargo, the Chinese engine and components makers at least have a market in the military.

    So the embargo is both a bane and blessing. The bane, of course, is reliance on vastly inferior non-western technology. But the blessing is that the subsidiary firms of AVIC I & II would have been swamped by a Chinese preference for Western technology otherwise.

    ——————————————————————-
    Notes
    (1) http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bin/client/modele.pl?prod=12613&session=dae.4750575.1093387615.QSvFX8Oa9dUAAGBNYho&modele=jdc_1
    P&W’s PW150B Engine Selected for China’s Y8F600 Aircraft

    http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2003_March_20/ai_98996642
    Dowty Propellers Awarded $160M Propeller System Contract

    http://english.people.com.cn/english/200011/07/eng20001107_54594.html
    “The MA 60 is the latest development of China’s long-running Y7 family of turboprop airliners and utility transport. It differs significantly from its predecessors through the addition of Pratt & Whitney PW127J turboprops with Hamilton Standard props, a Rockwell Collins cockpit avionics fit, and a more modern passenger cabin.”

    in reply to: Pictures, news and speculation thread #2664815
    GoldenDragon
    Participant

    Now here is a big one for the rumor mill! 😀

    According to a post on the Chinese-language forum WMF, the first J-7MF prototype (nicknamed the “Fire Unicorn”) just left plant recently. Prototype TWO and THREE are in assembly.

    Theoritically, this doesn’t make sense for Chengdu because they will have two products for the same space.

    But for the PLAAF, it is a good solution with a cheap BVR plane fitted with a homemade turbojet to replace all those J-6s. The J-7FM is supposed to be around $5 to 7 mln. That’s half the price of a FC-1.

    To be taken with a heavy shaker of salt 😀

    in reply to: Aircraft and SAM Prices #2664819
    GoldenDragon
    Participant

    Have been aware of Venik’s site for ages now Arthur, but how did he get to be such a target?

    The bad rep on the web came mostly from Venik’s claims concerning US aircraft (F-15s) shot over the Balkans. The evience were very flimsy.

    But that said, Venik’s descriptions of individual planes and weapons aren’t really that bad. He is obviously knowledgeable about Russian equipment.

    in reply to: J-8II Info #2664967
    GoldenDragon
    Participant

    It was Mao, who forced Stalin into the Korean-war. Not disputed by the historians now.

    The dumbest thing I ever heard. Mao “forced” Stalin into the War? Russia was NEVER IN that war.

    It was Stalin who trapped China into the Korean War. China was preparing for the invasion of Taiwan then. It wanted no part of the US.

    The USSR was never in the war beyond providing weapons. There were no 500,000 Soviet troops in Korea, fighting under their own flag like teh Chinese.

    China had to fight US firepower with horrendous equipment. The USSR had no part in the Korean War besides equipting N Korea and telling stories of so-called Russian fighter pilots years after the fact.

    This supposed Russian “help” if it ever occurred in numbers was clearly no good because the US dominated the air. And dominated it completely. China actually won on the ground but China was completely vulnerable to US attack from the air.

    If China were involved in the Korean War from the beginning, the US would have been pushed out completely. Stalin and N Korea began the war without China and only when N Korea miscalculated and American troops were approaching Chinese borders did China react.

    Very few historians dispute this. Taiwan was China’s number priority then as it is now. And why would China, a new nation at that point, want to take on the US over Korea instead of Taiwan? So I’ve no idea what historians you are talking about.

    in reply to: Pictures, news and speculation thread #2665355
    GoldenDragon
    Participant
    in reply to: Pictures, news and speculation thread #2665361
    GoldenDragon
    Participant

    Digging into Jane’s reporting on the SD-10, the error concerning AGAT is absolutely egregious because the manufacturer had already cleared this up in 2002.

    Jane’s Air Launched Weapons 2003

    SD-10 (PL-12)

    Type: Active-radar guided beyond-visual range air-to-air missile.

    Development:
    . . . . .

    CATIC is known to be developing X-band and Ku-band active radar seekers, which may be intended for the SD-10. However the latest reports confirm that China has been co-operating closely with Russia’s AGAT Research Institute, based in Moscow, and that AGAT is the source of the SD-10’s essential active seeker.

    Obviously, the so-called “latest reports” in 2003 were entirely wrong or simply conjectures. In fact, the author ignored Fisher’s report from Zhuhai 2002 where a Louyang representative “vociferously denied reports that the SD-10’s radar and data link are from the Russian AGAT bureau, insisting they were indigenous.” (1)

    So Jane’s said they had these “reports” comfirming that the AGAT seekerhead in the SD-10.

    But in the latest report after AGAT had denied involvement, they changed their tune and used an idiotic excuse about the similarity of the front sections between the SD-10 and R-77:

    “Recent press reports on China’s new SD-10 radar-guided air-to-air missile have commented on the similarity between the front section of the Chinese missile and that of the Vympel R-77/RVV-AE (AA-12 ‘Adder’). This has led to suspicions that the seeker of the Chinese missile is based on the Russian weapon’s AGAT 9B-1348 active-radar seeker, or is a customised 9B-1348 variant developed for China by AGAT.”

    It’s “suspicions” now? I thought they originally had reports “confirming” the AGAT in the SD-10?

    But of course what the manufacturer of the SD-10, Louyang, said in 2002 was not confirmation. So they needed to wait until 2004 for AGAT to clear this up?

    The same BS assumptions and “suspicions” are at work with the FD-60.

    Except for the development dates, the relationship to the LY-60 and that it is a BVR weapon intended for the PAF F-16s, everything else in that Jane’s report is suspect because the people covering its Chinese section tend to put their “suspicions” in as “confirmed” facts.

    ——————————————————————
    Notes:
    (1)http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/index.jsp?section=static&page=zhuhai2002
    “Sources noted that the PLAAF has conducted about 20 test flights for the new Louyang SD-10 (Project 129) active-guided air-to-air missile (AAM). The tests included full missile self-guided to target missions. Louyang vociferously denied reports that the SD-10’s radar and data link are from the Russian AGAT bureau, insisting they were indigenous. Louyang also said that they are considering SAM and naval SAM variants of the SD-10.”

    in reply to: Trainer Aircraft Market Could Be Worth $42B, Study Says #2665473
    GoldenDragon
    Participant

    The Chinese market for new aviation products.

    1. large airliners: up to 2400 from Boeing or Airbus over the next two decades(1)

    2. route feeder aircraft: another massive market; the ARJ-21 is expected to have a market of 500 in China(2); also the ERJ-145 (Embraer/Harbin) and the MA60 series are each expecting major sales (the MA60 orders for Chinese regionals are backlogged)

    3. cargo and lift (growth compounded by moderniziation of Western China which is not currently linked by road or rail.) Western suppliers of the Y8F600’s powerplant and avionics are expecting 120 to be sold in China,

    4. Possibly up to 10,000 helicopters for both civilian and military (2)

    5. light fighter: the number of FC-1 needed by the PLAAF is quoted by sources from 150 to 1000; whatever the light fighter, the numbers needed to replace the older J-6s and J-7s would be in the hundreds;

    6. medium fighters: Sukhoi officials believe that J-10 production could be up to 1500 according to a report by Richard Fisher (3)

    7. Heavy fighters/strike craft: Sukhoi expects over another 150 Su-30s (MKK variants) for China (4)

    8. the next generation advance trainer for the PLAAF will be in the hundreds; JL-9 and L-15.

    Simply put, the most massive aviation market in the coming decades outside the US.

    ——————————————————————
    Notes
    (1) http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20040818wo12.htm
    “Boeing also has plans to increase expenditure for airplane parts procured from China from 800 million dollars to 1.3 billion dollars by 2010, and is planning to penetrate the Chinese market, where there is expected to be a demand for 2,400 planes over the next 20 years.”

    http://en-1.ce.cn/Industries/Aerospare/200407/29/t20040729_1358611.shtml
    “European aviation group Airbus expects to obtain at least a 50 per cent share of the Chinese aviation market. Airbus believes that China will require an additional 1,500 large airplanes in the next two decades, becoming the world’s second largest market after the United States.”

    (2)http://www.aviationweek.com/shownews/03nbaa/topsto26.htm
    “China will need 1,000 commercial helicopters by the year 2010, some 2,000 between then and 2013, and a staggering 10,000 by 2020, according to the latest forecast from AVIC II, China’s major helicopter manufacturer.”

    (3) Richard Fisher’s report was at http://www.uscc.gov/mair1.htm
    We discussed it in this forum at http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=16815

    “according to the officials at Sukhoi, China will get 1200 to 1500 J-10s and more importantly already has 300 Flankers”

    (4)http://www.sptimes.ru/archive/times/997/news/b_13329.htm
    “I estimate that China will need a further 150 fighters [Su-30MKK], which they could either buy or manufacture under a Russian license,” Makiyenko said.”

    in reply to: J-8II Info #2665852
    GoldenDragon
    Participant

    Quit arguing with him crobato. I hate to say it, but I think his Japanese nationality is blinding him from the facts.

    Flogger is Japanese? He sounds like a carbon copy of the looney at CDF Strevitel, who said he was Jewish, then Brazilian, then Mexican and then something else 😀

    From the FX thread, Flogger tried to hint he’s South American/Brazilian but was corrected by our Brazilian members on views concerning Embraer and the space program.

    Oh, Strevitel crowds CDF with thousands of non-topic Flogger pictures.

    in reply to: Pictures, news and speculation thread #2665860
    GoldenDragon
    Participant

    Not only is the FD-60’s range assumed (and badly off by any logical calculations.) The actual designation type in Chinese service is assumed also. The Chinese export press release simply said FD-60 and the LY-60. It made no mention of PL-anything.

    In fact, other groups assume it is a PL-10, not PL-11.

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/ly-60.htm

    “The Air Force version of the LY-60 is the FD-60 semi-active radar-guided air-to-air missile carried by the J8B fighter plane, which is very similar to the Aspide AAM of Italy in appearance. This missile, which is evidently also known as the PL-10 [Pili = Thunderbolt, or Pen Lung = Air Dragon] medium range air-to-air missile is a Chinese copy of the Italian Aspide, which was developed from the American AIM-7E Sparrow. The bodies of the two missiles are generally similar, though the wings of the air-to-air PL-10 mirror those of the Sparrow, while the LY-60 wings have evidently been truncated to improve storage. The application of the same missile to both air-to-air and ship-to-air applications emulates the American practice with the Sparrow, which started life as an air-to-air missile with subsequent shipboard deployments.

    Maximum effective range
    AA – PL-10 60 km (head on attack)
    SAM LY-60 18 km”

Viewing 15 posts - 1,801 through 1,815 (of 2,918 total)