The question is why China needed to 1) take a failed design that depended on American parts from a country such as Israel that had NO track record in designing aircraft and 2) spend extra resources bringing in the Russians to work on this foreign design.

Why not simply use a Russian design?

What makes this failure of an Israeli design better than what the Russians could have come up with for the Chinese on their own? What did China gain from the Lavi that it could not gain from the Russians?

If China needed to bring in the Russians anyways then why bothering using an Israeli design when Russia has more than a few of its own?

Every Lavi is accounted for in Israel. There is no missing Lavi. So China didn’t even get a plane but just a set of papers?

And Israel would jeopardize its future by knifing the US in the back? And the US Congress refuse to even investigate this and bring this out into the open?

Absolutely NOTHING makes sense here.

So I rather believe the Israeli government on the J-10, Strevitel. The Israelis are not suicidal and — unlike the stereotypes that you entertain — are not so greedy that they would backstab their own benefactor and the guarantor of their survival for a pittance in whatever would have come from a sale of a failed aircraft that couldn’t even fly in the local airforce.

Stop your boring strevitel and Chinese forum complains read your self and you will find who is the racist i said to you read Russian articles about the J-10

So you are insisting that Israel has backstabbed the United States?

And the Israel government, furthermore, is continuing to lie about this and the US government refuses to take action?

So why hasn’t the Lavi question been blown wide open in Congress?

Because the most obvious reason is there is no evidence that a plane dependent on American technology and parts could possibly fly in China where American parts and technology are denied.

and later we talk the Russians worked in China and they said there is a Lavi connection in the J-10 program

Well, then if the Russians were there, why would China bother with a failed design from a country that has never designed its own aircraft and which was dependent on American technology and parts to boot?

Are you saying that this design which Israel can’t even build for its own airforce is better than what the Russians can come up with on their own?

Are you making sense at all?

hehehehe Powder that was developed further in Europe and science that was developed in Europe.

The J-7 was developed further in China. What’s the difference, Strevitel?

Russia only used the nene to shorten time but Russia has so good mathematicians and scientist that they have developed so much avaition technology that besides the US no one stands behind them

Chinese are even better mathematicians as they won most of the mathematic Olympiads in the two decades. And if you want to go that route, according to WESTERN studies such as the “Bell Curve,” East Asians like the Chinese are around 10% more intelligent on average than Europeans :rolleyes:

The Lavi is not a failure is a success for Israel it is flying as the J-10 😉

It is an absolute and complete failure when it can’t even fly in your own airforce. The Lavi depended on American technology, American money and Americans period. If the Lavi could be built without American parts then Israel would have built it.

The J-10 as we all know is not dependent on American parts. If it were based on the Lavi then the US would have pulled the plug on it. So how much of the American-dependent Lavi is the J-10?

Of course, there are those insanely stupid enough to think that the US would allow China to build the Lavi but not Israel :rolleyes:

Why you distort the aviation history?

Why do you bring irrelevant items into this discussion, Strevitel?

There would no be any J-10 would not Russia and Israel had been involved in the program.

Russia would not be flying jets if it weren’t for the Nene. Israel has never created an aircraft without massive gifts in money and technology from the US.

Without any foreign influence China would not be flying aircraft

:rolleyes: Without American influence (the Wright brothers), Russia, France and the UK would be flying kites.

Without gunpowder, every nation would still be using swords and arrows. Why bother talking about who’s influencing who in airplanes if you are going to take that stupid argument, Strevitel?

Where are we claiming that China can’t create aircraft, even a wholly indigenous design?

Now where did I claim that you claimed China cannot create aircraft, Sean?

I spoke of the stupidity of people living in a virtual world who believes that aircraft would materialize out of nowhere if someone gave them a “design.” Unless you see yourself one of those then I made no reference to you. Besides, you’re one of us 😀

A “design” means absolutely if you haven’t means to create the thing.

As for JH-7 and the British engine, the entire Russian jet industry was based on a British jet engine. Why name the Spey vis-a-vis China and not the Nene vis-a-vis the USSR?

Tell me what percentage of the J-7 is made in Russia? If an idea alone means that something belongs to a nation for perpetuity then Winchester and Kalashnikov is Chinese because gunpowder was Chinese?

No, a Kalashnikov and all its parts are made in Russia so it Russian while a J-7 and all its parts are made in China so that is Chinese.

Now if you are saying that the J-7 is primitive because it is based on a design envisioned 50 years ago, you’d have no argument from me. But the fact is building aircraft of even 50-year-old designs, like 50-year-old manned space programs, are pursued successfully by only a handful of nations.

Sacrificing quality for quantity in the military usually means choosing between an expensive system which allows you to equip only a small number of troops with it versus a cheaper system that allows you to equip a lot more.

But the argument we’re having in this thread is really about something else. It’s about the plethora of projects — not individual examples of an expensive or cheap type.

The fact is the Chinese aircraft industry has massive overcapacity in both its manufacturing and research resources since the end of the cold war. The large amount of design variants comes from different firms (Chengdu, Shenyang, Guizhou, Harbin, Xian, etc.) whose workforce are being paid anyways to keep skilled workers and keep a continuum of experience at these firms.

Now would it better for China to consolidate and remove the excess so that resources and money could be concentrated on a smaller set of firms and people? Probably. The creation of AVIC I and AVIC II was a step in that direction.

But having a lot of different and parallel projects is less about sacrificing quality for quanity than about mis-using resources in a redundant manner.

Conversely, in a competive free market, there is ALWAYS a lot of redundancies. Why are there hundreds of models of cars on the market? Or 30 types of peanut butter?

Having lots of projects from different firms would be competitive and will eventually lead to better products.

There is a huge difference between making an aircraft (“indigenous” design or not) out of parts created entirely at home and assembling parts imported from the rest of the world. There is also a massive difference between building a type or two in small batches and building a huge amount of types (and their associated variants) in the hundreds if not thousands.

Take the J-7: even if the initial design of the J-7 was not Chinese, every example is a Chinese aircraft from the first bolt onwards. And there are over 1000 of them where not a single part needs to be imported.

Among the silliest ideas propagated on the internet is that copying a “design” will somehow make a plane magically appear :rolleyes:

This is stupidity of kids who live on the internet and think the world is virtual. In order for an aircraft to actually appear out of some design, huge infrastructure systems have to put into place. A “design” means nothing without the means to make it a reality. A “design” on paper whether it is thought up by someone “indigenously” or overseas means absolutely nothing unless the nation has the will, ability and resources to turn that design into an actual aircraft.

China has the ability to turn a large variety of designs from pen and paper into real aircraft. This isn’t something that most countries outside the P5 could do on the same scale.

You give the F-16, F-18, Su-27 and Mig-29 blueprints to Luxembourg, Peru, Sweden and China and no access to American or Russian parts and see who has the most examples of all four aircraft by the end of five, 10 and 15 year intervals.

Resources, personel and an established industrial and manufacturing base on the scale of the P5 are simply not there in most nations.