GoldenDragonFrom Yahoo News:
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo.com/util/anysize/380,http%3A%2F%2Fus.news1.yimg.com%2Fus.yimg.com%2Fp%2Frids%2F20050509%2Fi%2Fr4227409220.jpg?v=1
Shahid Latif, Air Vice Marshal of Pakistan Air Force and project director for the JF-17 Thunder fighter aircraft, presents a photo of the plane during a news conference at Pakistan Aeronautical Complex Kamra in Kamra, 80 km (50 miles) west of Islamabad, May 9, 2005. Pakistan, which has been seeking high technology aircraft for the last two decades, said on Monday it hoped to start joint production with China from 2007 of multi-role fighter jets. REUTERS/Mian Khursheed
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo.com/util/anysize/380,http%3A%2F%2Fus.news1.yimg.com%2Fus.yimg.com%2Fp%2Frids%2F20050509%2Fi%2Fr211598401.jpg?v=1
Pakistan Air Force officials stand near a model of the JF-17 Thunder fighter aircraft as they give a briefing about the new plane at the Pakistan Aeronautical complex in Kamra, 80km (50 miles) west of Islamabad, May 9, 2005. Pakistan, which has been seeking high technology aircraft for the last two decades, said on Monday it hoped to start start joint production with China from 2007 of multi-role fighter jets. REUTERS/Mian Khursheed
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo.com/util/anysize/380,http%3A%2F%2Fus.news1.yimg.com%2Fus.yimg.com%2Fp%2Frids%2F20050509%2Fi%2Fr2644993015.jpg?v=1
A Pakistani Air Force technician works on the cockpit of an aircraft at the F-7P Rebuild factory at Pakistan Aeronautical Complex Kamra (PAC) in Kamra, 80km (50 miles) west of Islamabad, May 9, 2005. Pakistan, which has been seeking high technology aircraft for the last two decades, said on Monday it hoped to start joint production with China from 2007 of multi-role fighter jets. REUTERS/Mian Khursheed
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo.com/util/anysize/380,http%3A%2F%2Fus.news1.yimg.com%2Fus.yimg.com%2Fp%2Frids%2F20050509%2Fi%2Fr1158284822.jpg?v=1
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo.com/util/anysize/380,http%3A%2F%2Fus.news1.yimg.com%2Fus.yimg.com%2Fp%2Frids%2F20050509%2Fi%2Fr1468060569.jpg?v=1
http://us.news3.yimg.com/img.news.yahoo.com/util/anysize/380,http%3A%2F%2Fus.news1.yimg.com%2Fus.yimg.com%2Fp%2Frids%2F20050509%2Fi%2Fr3802462361.jpg?v=1
Pakistani Air Force technicians work on an aircraft at the F-7P Rebuild factory at Pakistan Aeronautical Complex Kamra (PAC) in Kamra, 80 km (50 miles) west of Islamabad, May 9, 2005. Pakistan, which has been seeking high technology aircraft for the last two decades, said on Monday it hoped to start joint production with China from 2007 of multi-role fighter jets. REUTERS/Mian Khursheed
GoldenDragonGolden Dragon technology on the aircraft from the Lavi is anything, means from tyres to flight computer or the airframe etc etc etc,
Idiotic. Your very article talked about the “Lavi’s utter dependence for its success on not only American dollars, but also American technological know-how.”
According to your article, the Lavi was funded by Americans using American technology. It made perfectly clear that the Lavi was an American plane.
Passing American technology to a third country is treachery. Why would Israel risk its very survival by betraying and backstabbing the Americans?
You do not like the article simply because gives a non indigenous character to the J-10 and makes your statemenst less based upon historical facts.
I have a problem with the article because it contradicts Israel’s official position the Lavi was never transferred to China and was not involved in the J-10.
But I really have no problem with the article’s statement that the Lavi was an American-funded plane “utterly dependent” on American technology.
Because the Lavi is American at its core, Israel cannot sell it. Israel cannot sell technology that belongs to the US not Israel. Therefore the official Israeli position that the Lavi had nothing to do with the J-10.
Not that your personal assumptions has anything to do with the facts in this discussion but why do you think I would not like the J-10 to have an American background, either from the F-16 or from the American technology that Israel stolen for the Lavi?
GoldenDragonSo if I take a picture of mine in front of NASA, that makes me a lead scientist? 😀
Idiotic flamebait. As if by standing in front of NASA, you could get the space agency’s prototypes in your picture. Why doesn’t he stand in front of HAL somewhere and get his face next to a LCA and not bother the Pakistanis in this thread? 😀
If someone has 30 members of his organization pictured in front of the prototype of the latest NASA launcher, I would still not assume any one of the them is “lead scientist.” But the chances that they would be involved in the project.
If one wants to discuss, then discuss. Making repeated, badgering remarks is not debating but flaming.
GoldenDragonAcording to the link the then Israeli Minister of defence David Lari, acknowledged that some Lavi technology was trasfered to China to develop the J-10 David Lari was Israel Defence Ministry and they quoted him from an interview he gave to Associated Press so not only there are US inteligence reports but some Israeli high ranking minister recognition of Israeli participation in the J-10, and it is logic becasue Israel ranks as China`s second largest arms supplier
Lari did not mention the J-10 at all in the AP article. The original article said:
“David Lari, director general of Israel’s Ministry of Defense, acknowledged in an Associated Press interview that “some technology on aircraft” had been sold to China and that some Israeli companies may not have “clean hands.”
“Technology on aircraft” could mean anything, including the PL-8. He did not say – and no Israeli govmentment official had ever said – the J-10 is linked to the Lavi.
If you read the link, it is basically heavy with the treachery and duplicity of Israelis in cheating and betraying the United States. In fact, your link (
http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers/lavi.html) reads like “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”
It purportedly details Israeli scheming to sell American technology to other nations while tricking the Americans to pay for it.
For example:
Dov found the Lavi to be a project requiring the investment of billions of U.S. taxpayers’ dollars. Moreover, he learned the Israelis were planning to sell the Lavi – and its advanced American-designed weapon systems – to other countries in direct competition with the very U.S. aerospace companies that would provide their proprietary technology.
If you are going to use the articles in that link to connect J-10 to Lavi then you have better take the other information from the articles as truth also.
Sharon wanted Weinberger to grant export licenses for the wing and vertical tail composite design produced by the Grumman Corporation of New York; servo-actuators, produced by the Moog Corporation, also of New York; the Lear Siegler flight control computer; and a variety of software tools. He also had a list of future license requests that he was expecting to forward early in 1983. These and other subsystems and design capabilities underscored the Lavi’s utter dependence for its success on not only American dollars, but also American technological know-how.
If the Lavi is American (as it is stated in your link) then what possible gain could make Israel commit this disgusting act of betrayal to its own protector? Money is more important to Israelis than American friendship and Israel’s very survival?
GoldenDragonJust for Deino
Lookie here, a 1:1 model of the J-11.
Now that’s what we call modeling, no?
GoldenDragonWhy, when in regular service already?
Why not? Military equipment is always better off hidden unless they are up for export. The JH-7 was in squadron service for years before we saw it at the airshow in 1998.
GoldenDragonOne picture is worth a thousand words.
GoldenDragon* Hyper still itching his head….* :confused: 😮
FC-1. That photo is a capture from a CCTV program segment which also included movies of the FC-1 testflights. Of course, the J-10 certainly won’t be on tv.
GoldenDragonI give in. J-10 is completely indigenous, even the bits of it that are Russian 😉
LOL. Whether is “completely” indigenous is besides the point. The point is the Israeli government denies involvement in the J-10. That fact is compounded by Israel’s lack of history and expertise in aircraft design. Backed further more by Israel’s dependence on the US and the complete lack of logical rewards for Israel to attempt such a dangerous thing.
In order to make a reasonable debate against the Israeli official statement, you need to prove a conspiracy and prove motive for that conspiracy.
As for the Russian bits, we can go back to the Nene and claiming British origins for MiG jets if we use the same logic.
BTW, Overscan, I enjoy your posts and contributions here and elsewhere 🙂
GoldenDragonha, that is just desperate. :rolleyes:
governments dont lie their a$$es off every time they open their mouth you know. :rolleyes:
Governments especially don’t continue lying when it could be thrown back at their faces. Because it reduces their credibility. If US intelligence had any firm evidence of the J-10 and Lavi, it would be forced fed to the Israelis until Israel comes out and admits it and we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
The crux of the argument revolves around a conspiracy theory of Israeli lying and backstabbing. There had better be proof and motive for such a dangerous course of action by the Israelis. The reward, a few dollars from China, is hardly worth it when matched against the American lifeline.
GoldenDragonBecause the Israeli government never lied about anything?
And you know they lied about the Lavi and J-10? How do you know?
You’re trying “prove” something with an opinion. Again, this is the same line of reasoning that UFO conspiracy nuts use. The US government denies that there were aliens at Roswell so that us is proof of aliens because the US gov is lying. What a stupid way to prove a connection.
Israel denies any connection between the J-10 and Lavi. That is a fact.
Do you know the racial origin of every Chengdu employee from 1987 to date? Do you know how many US and British engineers and designers have worked overseas?
Jeeeez……
Do you know? How about the racial origin of everybody at IAI? Maybe there are Chinese working there or even South Africans or a Nepali or two? Who knows and who cares?
Just because you don’t know the racial origin of everyone at Chengdu from 1987, you are claimimg that is proof that the J-10 is Israeli? That’s the most idiotic thing I ever heard.
I don’t know the racial origin of everyone at General Dynamics from 1971 to today either so using the same logic the F-16 could also be based on some mythical jet that is Israeli or Martian or whatever race of the people you don’t know about.
This is conspiracy reasoning where lack of certainly is used as proof.
GoldenDragonPLAAF August 1st demo team’s new J-7Gs
GoldenDragonHmmm. It seems we have an impasse here. In Crobato-land one design can only have a connection to another design if it is 100% identical down to the rivets.
Look it it from another angle. I’m head of preliminary design at Chengdu circa 1987 (or whenever J-10 really started). I want to design a new, reasonably lightweight plane to replace the J-7. I get out a plain sheet of paper, get out my pen and draw a shape. I have total freedom of choice. Should I choose
You would first choose the J-9 which was what the Chengdu designers did.
Either way, the J-10 layout IS based on the Lavi layout.
The J-10 is based on a single engined canard-delta layout.
Either way, the details of the design that matured as the J-10 differ in many ways from the Lavi, as Crobato likes to mention.
Using the same logic: because the J-9 canard-delta was designed before the Lavi, and based on previous Israel relations with China, you can’t preclude the J-9 as inspiration for the Lavi. The Lavi changed from the J-9 because it “matured.”
You can associate every delta-canard with an earlier delat-canard using this logic. You can always attribute differences to design evolution over time.
This doesn’t IN ANY WAY preclude the J-10 being derived from the Lavi configuration.
The J-10 is precluded from any derivation of the Lavi by the Israeli government itself. And by the fact that Israel never designed a new modern fighter.
The only thing in this whole argument that is not opinion is the Israeli statement on the subject – there is no connection between the J-10 and the Lavi.
GoldenDragonbut american reports say that Israeli engineers were seen at Chengdu in the J-10 assembly lines.
Israelis on Chinese assembly lines? That’s a new one for everyone here. What reports? How do Americans know that there is even an assembly line for the J-10?
We know of the J-10 being in production only from Chinese reports, not American ones.
opting for beleiving the Chinese Government or the Israeli Goverment instead of the US inteligence services is not a complete proof
Idiotic. There is no official US intelligence report on the Lavi being transferred to China or else the Israeli wouldn’t be denying it. Don’t confuse non-official quotes about US intelligence.
Israel is not going to lie in front of conclusive proof from the American intelligence services. If there were such proof, the US will make Israel eat its lies.
This idiot Israeli conspiracy theory grows more and more illogical.
GoldenDragonSince we’re indirectly on the subject of the Y-7 😀
Y-7’s descendant, the MA60, was recently inducted into Zimbabwe’s airline.
A very long article but some interesting look into China’s African focus. Perhaps, more K-8s, Y-8s and FC-1s in the future?
http://allafrica.com/stories/200505050529.html
New Planes Commissioned
The Herald (Harare)
May 5, 2005
Posted to the web May 5, 2005Harare
PRESIDENT Mugabe yesterday commissioned two MA60 aeroplanes that were recently bought from China by the Government for the national airline – Air Zimbabwe.
Speaking at the Harare International Airport, Cde Mugabe said the hand-over of the planes was yet another milestone in the long-established and co-operative relations with China.
…
China Aviation Industry Corporation senior vice president Professor Hu Wenming, who handed over the aircraft on behalf of his company, commended Air Zimbabwe’s choice in buying the MA60s.
This, he said, was because the make was an advanced turbo-propelled commuter aircraft that was a derivative of a mature Chinese aeroplane with 700 000 flight hours and 700 000 take-offs and landings.
The plane, which is certified by the Chinese Airworthiness Authority, he said, had reached the international level in terms of safety, economic, comfort and maintainability.
“The soaring oil prices in recent years have once again pushed turbo-prop aircraft to the front of the world market.
“As a competitive turbo-prop, the MA60 has got orders from Asia, Africa, South Pacific and South American countries,” he said.
Sign In
