GoldenDragonI know that, and the original Japanese design would definately have been more interesting. But i think we should beware of automatically assuming that unbuilt and/or untested designs by definition live up to their expectations. The more indigenous F-2 could just as well have ended up as a bigger lemon than the one which has seen it’s production cut last year.
Oh, I quite agreed that there is no guarantee that the original design have been better. They can’t be blamed for mangling a version of your favorite, the lawn dart 😀 It was purely political as you know.
Shortly after the war, yes. But already during the Korean War did the US start rebuilding the Japanese aviation industry again.
The US re-opened the Japanese industry in 1952 but there were limits (both those self-imposed and those under American direction) on what the Zaibatsu can build. There was a conscious effort not to pour too much resources into designing military aircraft even though there were vast numbers of trained manpower and design personnel for development and manufacture of fighters and bombers.
There was a break in the tradition of military a/c development and design in WWII and the Japanese a/c industry after 1952. The same could be said of Germany. There is little doubt, in my mind, that if Japan and Germany were allowed to progress naturally with their industries, they’d be the equal of France or Britain.
The designs coming out of Japan in the final years actually included some superlative prototypes and limited productions (Ki-100, the Ki-96, Reppu, Shinden, etc.) The Kikka was not a Me262 clone. Japan never got the blueprints though they were inspired by the general shape of the Me262 (reported by the Japanese ambassador.) The Kikka’s Ne-20 engine was not the Jumo of the Me262 – though, again, it was inspired by the general shape and workings of the early BMW turbojet engines.
The Kikka was actually rather poor performance-wise for a jet but the fact of the matter was that the Japanese industry could build from scratch a jet powered plane that actually flew. It was one of the top five aviation industries in 1945. But both Germany and Japan lost the leading edge after the war. Allied restrictions certainly had a hand in that happening.
GoldenDragonSimilaritis are pure coincidences. Lavi inputs are pure US propaganda.
Israel denied US claims as China did. :diablo: Who is willing to see, will see more differences than similarities. 😀
You are hinting that Israel is lying and betraying the United States? Careful, the Lavi is composed of entirely American tech. It’s a canardized F-16 down to its nose and intake (of course the engine is American) and if they are giving US technology to China then that is the ultimate betrayal of an ally that has guaranteed Israel’s existence.
You are playing into the stereotype that Jews will do anything for money including betraying friends, supporters and even the very guarantor of its survival. Israel has denied passing on a failed project like the Lavi to China. I chose to believe her.
But whether you believe Israel or not depends on your feelings about Israel. This isn’t the Python 3 which could be argued as something homegrown in Israel. This is about passing the F-16 onto China. Israel has never created a plane on its own – the Kfir is a Mirage, no more no less – and the Lavi is unequivocably American. technology at its core.
GoldenDragonBTW, the most impressive Japanese planes in the war was not the Zero, though it was dominant in the first six months of the Pacific War. The Zero was maneuverable but a death trap once the allies realized not to get into a turning fight with one. A few hits from a single strafing pass would turn a Zero into a fireball so the best tactic was hit and run.
The best planes were the Nakijima Ki-84 Hayate (which was fast and heavily armed and armored like Western planes and had the traditional extreme maneuverability of the Japanese fighter) and the Kawanishi N1K2 Shiden Kai (Kai like “Gai” in Chinese means “modified.”).
The N1K2 was a modified floatplane that was heavily armored and its maneurability was augmented by combat flaps and control surfaces that were ahead of its time. It could litterally weave its way between fighters in a dogfight. In February 1945, one IJN pilot, warrant officer Muto, took on 12 USN Hellcats and shot down four of them in a giant furball outside Yokosuka naval air station.
GoldenDragonThen you have this marvellous F-2. If someone can explain to me the reason for upscaling an F-16 in order to give it less payload and a horrible TWR against a far higher price, please explain that to me. Especially if you can’t get that super-duper indigenous radar ment to spot ships in the ocean to work.
Can’t blame them for the F-2’s desgin. The F-16 derivative was a political deal with the US. The Original F-X design for the F-2 project was a delta-canard.
What Congress wanted back then was for Japan to buy US aircraft outright to balance off the trade deficit. The two big sticks used the Americans were the threats of withholding the engine and sanctions on Japanese automotive imports.
The F-16 base design along with American subcontractors was the compromise that allowed Japan to continue with the project. Japan could have gone after their own engine but the economic (and diplomatic) fallout would have been prohibitive.
At any rate, the Japanese aircraft industry was heavily restricted after WWII in a way similar to the German one.
GoldenDragonAn interesting note on PLAAF recruiting. The PLA is supposedly conscript but is really all-volunteer since you have to apply in order to be “drafted.” The Army is seen as a way out of the countryside for many of China’s rural youth.
The problem is attracting and keeping educated men and women. This was actually helped by the mandatory military training for college students put in place shortly after the 1989 Tianenmen Square debacle. (After, a failed student uprising, the PLA decided to teach the students more about using assault rifles and hand grenades. Seems counterproductive but actually worked out in instilling respect for the armed forces among the educated,)
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-02/25/content_2620277.htm
Young Chinese apply for Air Force academies
http://www.chinaview.cn 2005-02-25 20:42:48BEIJING, Feb. 25 (Xinhuanet) — More than 70,000 young Chinese have applied to take the national exams for enrollment as a cadet in academies run by the Air Force of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA).
The applicants are graduates from more than 6,000 colleges and high schools from all over the country, said an Air Force spokesman.
This year, Air Force academies plan to recruit some women cadets from high school and university graduates, the spokesman said.
The recruitment is expected to end by September.
GoldenDragonAlso from Santa: probably our first look at a Y8F600 or Y8X. Note the six blade turboprops and solid nose.
GoldenDragonOne of the best detailed pictures on the K8E assembled in Egypt. Posted by Santa at CMF.
Note the “Advanced Jet Trainer” label on the placard.
GoldenDragonEighty percent of all investment ever put into China was and still is from Overseas Chinese – Hong Kong, Taiwan and SE Asia. The yearly percentage was even higher than 80% during the formative years of Chinese reforms the 1970s and 80s. The Japanese are only in China in a substantial way very recently.
The main foreign brands manufactured in China for cars and electronics are US and German (VW and GM) for the former and South Korean (Samsung) for the latter. Cars and electronics are the two Japanese mainstays and they’re far behind in China which is pretty telling of the lack of old Japanese investment compared to others.
Actually it is Japan that depends on China for exports of capital machinery to stave off a full-blown recession.(1) China depends far far less on Japanese investment than it does Hong Kong and Taiwanese FDI. In 2004, Japan had $14 billion surplus with China but put in less than $6 billion new investment.
The most important investors to China even today remain Overseas Chinese followed by the US, Europeans and even behind South Korea. Japan is only in the top five in recent years.
—————————————————————
Notes:
(1) http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/24/business/worldbusiness/24yen.html
New Concerns for Economy in Japan
“A steep drop in Japan’s trade surplus in January, combined with rising oil prices, raised concerns Tuesday that the economic slump that began last year could continue into 2005.
. . .
One hopeful sign for Japan, many economists say, is the continuing strong growth in China, which surpassed the United States last year as Japan’s top trading partner.”
GoldenDragonIts possible the Y-8 AWACs will be used for naval patrols. The Y-8 has good endurance and can keep a close watch on enemy warships and aircraft in the Pacific Ocean.
China has plenty of long range anti-ship missiles. The Y-8 AWACs can provide long range targetting for these missiles as well as coordinate Su-30MK2s against enemy fighters in the Pacific Ocean.
An item posted in an earlier segment of this long-running thread said the Y-8 airborne radar programs (there are several) are funded mainly by the PLAN. While the PLAAF is looking for large and powerful threater-control AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control) like Phalcon or the new KJ-2000, the Navy is looking for smaller AEW (Airborne Early Warning) systems that can be deployed in numbers that would extend PLAN awareness into skies away from the reach of coastal ground radar stations.
GoldenDragonHere’s the training missile being loaded onto the Flanker (either a SK or J-11.) The same black bands of the training round in this picture are just visible in the disputed picture above.
GoldenDragonHere it is:
GoldenDragonYes, and the missile was also discussed. It turned out to be a practice round of the R-27 and didn’t have the normal pinched neck and flanges on the seekerhead that are tell-tale signs of a normal R-27. Hyperwarp posted a picture showing the practice round being loaded up on a MKK.
The original picture I posted was a lot bigger. I’ll look to see if I have it around to repost.
GoldenDragonThey r report PL-11B enter service with PLAAF J-8II. A picture showing the AMR-1 seeker in 02 Zuhai comfirms that! AMR-1 seeker is use on PL-11,not PL-12. By the way,if yr theory is correct.Don’t u find it strange for J-10 to equip with a AMRAAM and SARH missile?
The AMR-1 story for the PL-11B is that the PL-11 was actually later retrofitted with the a AMR-1 derivative which was used for the PL-12. The PL-11 started off life as a SARH while the PL-12 began life as a ARH. It would be more strange for a plane to carry two missiles with the same characteristics and possibly the same seekerhead. It makes no sense to carry two kinds of ARH (unless it is for economic reasons.)
During and after the first Gulf War two Sparrows and two AMRAAMs were the standard BVR loadout for selected air-to-air (mainly) F-15 units – not all units had AMRAAM. The A2A loadout of many USAF planes, even with the prevalence of AMRAAM today, still have both the SARH Sparrow and the AMRAAM. One, the Sparrow is cheaper and the older stock need to be used and two, it is actually more accurate in certain situations, such as sea-level cruise missiles/attackers.
ADDED: Most of the Gulf War kills were Sparrow (which had something in the 80% range for fired/hit ratio). The first AMRAAM kills over Iraq came during no-fly zone era.
Note: Showtime, “AMRAAM” is actually the name of the US military’s Advance Medium Range AAM. Weapons of this class is called ARH (Active Radar Homing) air-to-air missiles. The SD-10 and PL-12 are ARHs in the same classification as the AMRAAM but they cannot technically be called AMRAAMs.
GoldenDragonSupposedly a WZ10 pictured above Changhe proving grounds in Jingdezhen!
Too small to really be sure. So file away under speculation.
GoldenDragonVery nice! The PL-11 is a SARH missile not a “AMRAAM” type ARH. You could tell by the larger forewings.
Another of the same picture from WNF.
Sign In
