GoldenDragonIf it were, the Lavi design (which is basically American with American-funding and dependent on American technology and parts) would have been made into an American plane.
There is no American Lavi in the USAF just as there is no Israeli Lavi in the IAF which tells you how “advance” the design was.
There is the IAI Lavi derivative in the PLAAF AKA J-10 it tells you how advanced the lavi was ask SIBNIA :dev2:
An American funded design that didn’t work for either the IAF or the USAF. But you see it in China?
Sounds like you are so desperate to claim the failed Lavi as “successful” (just because it comes from your Jewish brethren) that you’re willing accept to conspiracy theories :rolleyes:
Why not claim the EF2000 as well? Oh right, you already claimed the X-31 and every canard-delta in the world as Israeli :rolleyes:
GoldenDragonNo it was not redundant, but it shows that you do not grasp the details related with that. Like your helpless “question” in the end.
Russia stole the alloy example from the UK. It was redundant because the Labor Paarty eventually gave the Nene to the USSR. (On par with the Rosenbergs stealing and giving the nuclear bomb to the USSR.)
Again aside from idiotic insults, what is your point?
GoldenDragonThe Russians revealed, that during there official visits to RR-factories they clandestine collect samples of material the Nene was built of.
Yes. The Russians stole the Nene’s alloys which was redundant since the UK gave the Nene to Russia. This created a great scandal in the UK for the Labor party.
The prototypes of the MiG-15 did still use Nene delivered from RR for first flights.
Yes. The MiG-15 used a British engine.
I’ve already said that.
What is your point? We should dismiss the Russian jet aviation industry because it started with a British engine?
GoldenDragonthe Lavi was even ahead of the F-16 and F-18 by at least 10 years, because this aircraft represent an example of the Eurofighter and Gripen generation.
The dumbest thing I ever heard.
The Lavi is a failed design that was based on American technology (F-16) to begin with. It was in no way, shape or form ahead of the F-16 or F-18.
If it were, the Lavi design (which is basically American with American-funding and dependent on American technology and parts) would have been made into an American plane.
There is no American Lavi in the USAF just as there is no Israeli Lavi in the IAF which tells you how “advance” the design was.
GoldenDragonJust a step too far without enough knowledge, where logic is not enough. The hardware alone is nothing, when you do not have proof, to what specifications all parts of that are built.
Hardware and infrastructure is everything. If you’ve ever been in involved in a business that did any kind of manufacturing you’d understand.
You can design the greatest thing in the world and you would NOT be able to make it unless you’ve designed it with the knowledge of the infrastructure you have.
Are you saying that you need to design something first then spend the next 15 years developing and building the infrastructure to actually make that design?
If design were so important and infrastructure were so much less important then why not design a space-ship and have the machinery to make the spaceship magically appear? Why stop at airplanes?
Simply handing a design of say the Lavi that expects American subsystems and parts made to American specifications to a country like China which have an entire different infrastructure is ludicrous.
Unless you are saying that the Lavi design also includes the blueprints for the hundreds of machine tools, composite curing systems, etc. and China then spent decades building and putting those Lavi-required American infrastructure into place, the Lavi cannot be made in China.
The biggest problem we have with kids on the internet is the idea that everything is virtual and all you need is a “idea.” No, that is not the case in the real world. Parts do not grow miraculously from a paper design.
You cannot retool the massive machinery in the Chinese aviation infrastructure (which actually employs more people than the American one) when you hand them a paper design that requires US parts.
The Lavi could be made in the US or Canada if the design were handed to them. It could not be made in China just with the blue-prints.
Maybe reduced lifetime demands will do at first, when the demanding specifications could not be met or fullfilled in the near future a.s.o.
With the rising capabilities and experiences gains of the Chinese aviation industry the present FC-1 is no longer the former Super-7 project. We keep in mind that the Pakistani had not much inferior to the own F-16s in mind and the highest intrest to do all, that it may come true. On the Chinese side it was the J-10 at first and they exspected F-16s performances from that. The much more demanding J-10 had suffered some reductions in related technology to get it into the air at first, but it is a tremendous jump in capabilities at all, when we keep the problems of assembling the J-11 f.e, in mind. Without Russian engine-technology none of that fighters mentioned did fly really, before we become too excited about the Chinese aviation capabilities.
The Super-7 formed the project base of the FC-1 project. But the FC-1 officially began in 1999 when Pakistan and China actually signed a co-development pact.
One of the provisions was that the FC-1 would be modular with the engine, avionics, radar, weapon systems and even the flight control system (FBW, partial-FBW, standard) totally decoupled from air frame. That pretty much created a new aircraft that might have kept some of the Super 7 lessons but is no longer anywhere near the original Super 7 design (which was based on leveraging the J-7 parts infrastructure.)
The FC-1 probably share more with the J-10 in its backend infrastructure.
The J-11 required new infrastructure to be put into place. This also exemplifies how idiotic the idea that the J-10 could have been built with just the blueprints from the Lavi (which couldn’t even be made into a production machine in Israel.) The J-11 was a full-technology transfer that was above board and still it ran into problems (though far less than people think.)
As for Russian engines. The JH-7 flies on British technology. But then again, even Russia’s massive industry would not have flown if it were not for British engine-technology.
Was the world excited in 1950 when the first MiG-15 flew with the British Nene? Sure it was. Because the entire Russian aviation industry could be traced to the Nene does that mean we could dismiss the Russians as aircraft producers? Of course not, it would be ludicrous.
Every advancement in human technology is based on previous inventions. It’s a timeline. Fire–> gunpowder –> combustion-engine –> Nene –> Klimov. So what is your point?
GoldenDragonActually, they denied transferring the entire Lavi program, but not technology from the Lavi.
I don’t think anyone has a problem with that. There is more than ample evidence that the US, UK and other Western influences on Chinese projects from that era (JH-7, K-8, Super-7, Peace Pearl.)
But the idea that the J-10 is the Lavi just because it is a delta-canard is ludicrous. Especially a Lavi design that failed to be put into production in Israel much less China which is embargoed from US tech that the design was completely dependent on.
GoldenDragonOf course, we can debate what “more or less a version of the Lavi” means.
We can also debate whether the translation was correct. We can debate whether that quote came from people who actually had worked with the J-10.
Common sense says you don’t put unnamed sources over official statements of denial.
GoldenDragonIt shows your have real personal problem.
Huh? You and Strevitel are the only ones resorting to personal (“you are humiliated because of China”) or racial attacks (“eastern ways of thinking”) to reply to very basic points.
These are the facts:
1. Israel denies any passing of the Lavi to China,
2. the Lavi itself was a failure in Israel and was never put into production,
3. the Lavi was dependent on American technology and American parts — which China had no access to.
Try replying without calling Chinese people “nationalistic” for simply giving our viewpoint.
If you cannot accept an answer from a Chinese person without dismissing it as “nationalism”, simply say so :rolleyes:
The fact remains you cannot reply to the facts without conspiracy theories or convoluted explanations.
GoldenDragonGolden Dragon, first you call SIBNIA because they indeed worked in China along side Chengdu in the J-10 program and they claimed the Lavi is the direct J-10 ancestor
Idiotic. You can call Lockheed Martin and ask them about the F-35 and see how far you get. :rolleyes:
At least give us the name of the person who said the “J-10 is more or less a Lavi.” You can’t just call up a aerospace company without a name just ask about the “J-10.” What kind of childishness is this?
Give us the name of the person who said those things and we can look up his quotes and see if that was said is what you are claiming and if this person actually had any clue or was simply BSing. So we can ask for him. Or a reporter at AFM can ask for him.
You give me an un-named source and expect it to counteract an official denial from the Israeli’s government?
GoldenDragonDo you have realized even that non blamed China for its clever behavior to catch-up as fast as possible.
Do you notice no Chinese ever disclaimed Russian, American, British or even Israeli contributions?
Again we point out these facts about the Lavi:
1. Israel denies any passing of the Lavi to China,
2. the Lavi itself was a failure in Israel and was never put into production,
3. the Lavi was dependent on American technology and American parts — which China had no access to.
We are “nationalistic” for pointing that out? But jews like Strevitel can claim a failed Israeli project as the basis for a Chinese plane (when it is obvious that the canard-delta J-9 was the predecessor) and they are not “nationalistic”? Is this stupid “nationalism” charge not just something you can use for Chinese people or other Asians but jews and other westerners like Strevitel can claim the world and not be “nationalistic”? :rolleyes:
GoldenDragonI’ve serious doubts about SIBNIA commenting on the J-10.
In fact, if you lookup SIBNIA and J-10 on the internet, you would only get Strevitel/Flogger’s posts on AFM as results :rolleyes:
GoldenDragonCall the Israeli government, Strevitel.
These are the facts:
1. Israel denies any passing of the Lavi to China,
2. the Lavi itself was a failure in Israel and was never put into production,
3. the Lavi was dependent on American technology and American parts — which China had no access to.
GoldenDragonIn fact i can tell you China is becoming a teacher but you have to say the truth China learnt and was taught by Russia and up to a degree Israel and the Chinese aviation is full of that evidence
Where is hell did Israel learn? How did Israel all of a sudden developed this aviation industry out of nowhere? China could and did learn from Russia. But Israel? Israel has neverdeveloped a full fighter on her own.
This is stupidity and “jingoism” of the extreme, Strevitel. You are claiming the world for Israel simply because you are a jew.
The Israeli aviation industry is dependent on American funding and American technology. None of which was available to China. So how in hell can the Lavi, which not even a viable design in Israel, be succesful in China?
The Israeli aviation industry is distinctly inferior even to the Chinese one. We do NOT see Israeli aircraft competing against Chinese ones on the world market.
GoldenDragonYou forget the Russians, the Russian worked in China making the J-10 and the claim the J-10 is a Lavi variant and a international program finaced by China with Israeli and Russian participation.
The J-10 is Chinese no doubt but that is was developed with foreign tech is a reality.
Who forgot the Russians? I also added the British and the Americans and I listed the real projects that they were involved in.
Strevitel, you refuse accept any reply from a Chinese person without calling him names because you’re a racist. Because you’re a jew you can claim the J-10 is Israeli even though the Israeli government itself has denied it.
But to you a Chinese person cannot even point out that the J-10 is made in China and the Lavi was a failure that depended on American parts and subsystems that China had NO access to.
You refuse to even listen to us telling you that the Brits and the Americans were deeply involved Chinese projects in the 1980s. You insist on insulting us simply because you refuse to believe that the J-10 is anything but Israeli when all the facts goes against it.
GoldenDragonStrevitel, you are grasping for straws to claim the J-10 for Israel. You’re doing it because of your ethnic pride and your idiotic stereotypes of Chinese which got you banned from CDF.
You resort to calling anyone of Chinese ethnicity as “humiliated” when they point out that the J-10 is produced only in China and it flies only in China.
I believe it is more likely that you are humiliated because we have pointed out that you are laying claims to an aircraft in China because you cannot accept that the Lavi was a failure when it got cancelled.
So let’s stop this retarded talk about who is “humiliated” and who is “living in paradise.”
The Chinese are not the ones claiming that a plane on the other side of the world is theirs just because a failed project like the Lavi reached prototype stage. The Chinese are not the ones who is claiming the X-31 and every delta-canard in the world is theirs just because the Lavi reached prototype stage.
All the Chinese say is that a plane that is produced in China and is flown only in China is Chinese. You on the other hand claims everything from Israel to China as “Israeli.”
Sign In
