😉

[ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”full”,”data-attachmentid”:3872553}[/ATTACH]

To admit it is progressing even faster than [ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”medium”,”data-attachmentid”:3871511}[/ATTACH][ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”medium”,”data-attachmentid”:3871512}[/ATTACH][ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”medium”,”data-attachmentid”:3871513}[/ATTACH][ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”medium”,”data-attachmentid”:3871514}[/ATTACH] I expected

[ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:”none”,”data-size”:”medium”,”data-attachmentid”:3871510}[/ATTACH]

A new and slightly longer video frkm the Okhotnik’s maiden flight

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xFYc3KCbHw

This is the problem. You’ve entered a discussion with an agenda, or a chip on your shoulder. To defend your favorite country or aircraft, thats why you’ve became sensitive to any kind of discussion relating to it, whether positive or negative.

I know everyone here has a bias towards something, but that’s not the right direction to go in a discussion. You look like you’re trying to pick fights in the Indian section, Russian section, etc by inviting some kind of comment on China.

The pro-russians here, even if they have some bias, have shown willingness to entertain the idea of cooperation with China.

Hmm … but where do I defend my favourite country (esp. since it is NOT MY country)? In no way I proposed the Russians to buy the J-20, nor to co-develop the FC-31!? I only question – based on my limited knowledge – the proposals made by others often enough with a reasonable explanation. If some don’t like this or think this is a biased defence of my favourite country or against Russia, then it is not my problem, but at least it should be a basis for a decent discussion. This however is barely possible if most proposals are based on this attitude I mentioned. If others share this not, then let us debate, but statements from certain members like “Russia has to lead since only Russia knows and has … ” are IMO a bit narrow-minded. Also my proposals so far either were simply deliberately ignored or just turned down as a joke.

So let’s try again:

– Il-96M: as a tanker IMO too late since the PLAAF will introduce a Y-20 based design. However as [USER=”4563″]Trident[/USER] mentioned, it would have been a great option years ago.
– Tu-204: again the same issues … China has now well established its Y-8/-9 family and I’m not sure if a Tu-204 based design would be preferred against a C919 based one. IMO the PLAAF will prefer an indigenous solution.
– carrier: again; why should China invest in yet another STOBAR carrier with ski ramp when it already has a CATOBAR carrier under construction. Here I would see the option for Russia to use this more modern design as a basis and add nuclear reactors. a win-win for both.
– LHD: The same with the Type 075 LHD
– co-development of a new STOVL carrier borne fighter
– rockets for space transportation, and space exploration

Deino

Do the Chinese have any radar in development passed 2020 in development?

No the Chinese have surely Not any radar in development passed 2020 in development, since they are lazily sitting around?!

Come on, only since we don’t know their exact designation to assume they don’t gave anything in development is ridiculous. If this system then is better, worse or equal, is another question…

Why would China be interested in a project with Russia if they had all the technology already? …

Simply for the same reason, other cooperation projects were initiated, executed and successfully completed: to share resources, since ghe burden to carry on alone is much harder – and IMO this is the reason, why at least one if not both great European projects will fail – and eventually since it strengthens a political alliance.

That’s why it is called cooperation.

aww thanks to you and panzer fist. I agree, there are too many fan boys who have strong biases to certain countries and end up trolling the works of other countries :rolleyes:. can’t we just appreciate all jets :angel:

In the Russia China collaboration thread, deinonychus is simply having a hard time to accept any kind of positive Russian contribution.

Again a post, that only shows how less you know me. Actually there are a lot of interesting aspects, some IMO impossible, since Russia would refuse anything from China, which would be beneficial to them, while on the other side others the PLAAF would refuse … most of them are however quite strange like the proposal by our own Russian prime fan with his Il-96 calims of +24k km range and the R-77 reaching 800 km, but otherwise quite interesting.

Especially – if you would have cared – I never proposed anything from China for the Russians to buy … not even the J-20 but you will surely answer, the reason for this, the Russians buy nothing from China since it is from China.

But anyway….

IRC, all your posts in the Tejas section were strictly limited to.. Is it here yet? why is it late? All you’ve done in the Tejas section was make cheap shots at its schedule.

Like the others said.. J-20 is mostly harmless. but i noticed he seems to pick on people who are overly sensitive, for the LOLs

Thanks for your reply and maybe you are correct, my knowledge is limited on India but that should not prevent me – like others too – to raise certain maybe critical issues or simply the interest for news.

My point is, that given India’s own ambitions the LCA is late IMO, it#s production rate too small and these constant evolutions to yet another iteration only delay it even more. So if it is inappropriate to rise such issues, then I should really leave this forum, but on the other side why is each critical question from my side replied by a stupid comment – sorry to say so, including in you post above – as if I would rate the J-20 the non-plus-ultra fighter, as if I would suggest the IAF to get the JF-17!?

I never did and I will never do so, so why opening up another side battle-field I never intented to open only since some don’t like my comments?
And by the way, you are complaining my limited or too less positive contribution to this topic … is started countless random threads with comparisons of more value, is posting blatant lies in the Russian, Turkish or wherever section better than a critical question?

My concern – and indeed, I have a problem with this is – that we all have our favourites here and we are probably over critically nit-picking on other projects and that’s fine, but I don’t understand, why a critical question is sometimes rated a more severe “crime”- just look at the Turkish TFX thread – than posting pure rubbish, out of the blue and overhyped, simply false information? Why is it rated some sort of sin, ort even like a blasphemy to question the LCA, the TFX and even the Su-57? Why are each of these questions not replied in a technical manner but most often with an accusation “the J-20 is not better”, “why suggest them to buy the JF-17” even if these issues are completely irrelevant. That’s what I means. It’s like in the Kindergarten: much easeier to open up another front, to twist words, to lie, even edit the own original post to make the other one look stupid and then even more to make fun of it, instead of given a decent reply?

Again, don’t get me wrong, it is not as an offence and probably I indeed should reconsider my way of posting, but I am I the only one who sees the LCA critical?
Given its long, long development history it was more than once re-evatuated, is still again being redesigned, enlarged and modified: The resulting Mk.2 is de facto a new aircraft, the naval Mk.2 even more and if you compare them with what was once planned, what was achieved and what is planned it is IMO at least allowed to ask.
Not that re-evaluating, redesigning is something bad, it’s just the norm, but if you compare the original Tejas TD, their evolution thru the prototypes and now LSP aircraft, the planned Mk.1A update and the future plans (Mk.2, naval Mk.2, trainers and even stealthy concepts) and put this all into perspective of India’s own goals and ambitions and even more put the timetable on the side … then I have very serious issues to say it is a successful project with a huge future prospect (again, given India’s own plans).

Best,
Deino