Another Cheap Chinese Copy

ahmedsid

Top Gun
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
2,960
Likes
252
Russian gave China the blueprints ,tek components and profiles of MIG-21 in 1961/3/30 , China first copied, then independently made, and finally developed their own MIG-21, which is now the famous J-7.

Your eastern enemy had used J-7 to shot down many india jets, I'm sure you can't forget that part.
Please do let us know how sucessful the chinese Mig 21 copies were. I mean, how many IAF planes did the Paks shoot down with the J7s???? And Which all wars were they involved in, Worldwide and in Pakistan! All this will go onto prove how effective your copies were.
 

amitkriit

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
2,463
Likes
1,927
Russian gave China the blueprints ,tek components and profiles of MIG-21 in 1961/3/30 , China first copied, then independently made, and finally developed their own MIG-21, which is now the famous J-7.

Your eastern enemy had used J-7 to shot down many india jets, I'm sure you can't forget that part.
Who is our eastern enemy, and when did they shoot our jets down with J-7?

India has shown how technical development can be carried out genuinely, one fine example is our Space Program. I am an engineer myself, and appreciate the value of "Original design", because if u design under influence of some blueprint, you will always incorporate flaws inherent with that blueprint, which are really hard to eliminate, no matter how hard you try.
 

hbogyt

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
231
Likes
11
The missile is largely based on Patriot 2. It was doing to use a slant box launcher. Then they saw the S-300.........
 

Vladimir79

Professional
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
1,404
Likes
82
Honestly,Chinese J-7 is copied from MIG-21, and China has developed and refined the J-7 fighter now which is the best version in MIG-21 family.
MiG-21 Bison is the best of the family, a J-7 is no match for the R-77 missile.

But so far, the India can't even make or COPY the MIG-21 fighter all by themselves . :blum3:
Why would they waste their time developing an obsolete aerocraft?

Maybe you want to say sth about the LCA. Well,tell me how can you guys develop some highly advanced aircraft without the ablity to produce some less advanced one. BTW, the China J-10 are already in service now, where is the LCA??
If you want to get technical, China cannot even make the J-10. They have failed in every modern fighter programme they have ever tried to be completely self-sufficient. We are still making billions selling engines to PLAAF. India is having the same engine problems they are so it is no reason to mock them. DRDO could easily buy engines from GE to run Tejas, but they are trying to be self sufficient from the start.

As far as developing an obsolete fighter; it makes zero sense.

High-tek can not be bought or borrowed. Because nobudy would give you the high-tek. You are on your own. R&D step by step,that is the only way.
To create an efficient R&D process must go with the times. Developing obsolete fighters is not the answer. Learning from others to help your industry get off the ground is how it is done. If you want to go it alone you can play like Iran who tries to reinvent the wheel and ends up with something little better. China wouldn't even have a remotely modern military if it wasn't for Russian exports and technical cooperation. Even we are turning to France for the items we do not have the time to develop. If you are content with a military two generations behind the world leaders, feel free to isolate your industries, if you want cutting edge, you are going to have to cooperate with foreign firms. That is the nature of the global defence complex. Even USA buys foreign technology to stay on top, no one is imune to these realities.
 

ZOOM

Founding Member
Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
577
Likes
11
March 11, 2009: China is now offering its HQ-9 anti-aircraft missile system for export, as the FD-2000. Mostly used by the army, Chinese HQ-9 brigades are mobile, and equipped with a brigade headquarters (with a command vehicle, and four trucks for communications and maintenance), six battalions (each with a missile control vehicle, a targeting radar vehicle, a search radar vehicle and eight missile launch vehicles, each carry four missiles in containers).
A decade ago, China began introducing the HQ-9. Over a decade of development was believed to have benefitted from data stolen from similar American and Russian systems. The HQ-9 missile is similar to the U.S. "Patriot," and is deployed in ships as well. The radar apparently derived much technology from that used in the Russian S-300 system.

The HQ-9 missile has a max range of about 100 kilometers, weighs 1.3 tons and has a passive (no broadcasting) seeker in the missile. China has installed this system in its new, 6,500 ton 052C class destroyers. The 052C installation has 48 missiles fired from vertical launchers. Unlike the American "hot launch" (where the rocket ignites while the missile is in the launch tube), the Chinese use a "cold launch" system. This uses compressed air to eject the missile from the launch tube, and then the rocket motor ignites. Ship designers are still debating which system is safer and more effective.

Russia and the United States are debating how to deal with the growing Chinese use of stolen technology, especially for weapons systems that are exported and compete against the systems they are copied from.

Air Defense: Another Cheap Chinese Copy

Above news clearly suggests that how China has achieved milestone as far as reverse engineering of complex weapon system is concerned. We always debate about copyright infringement which breaks international law, but at the end of the day what really matters is the quest to achive complete supremacy in Military technology. In fact, superpowers like US, Russia and some European nations themselves have followed this path many decades ago and now they have achived complete expertise in Military R&D.

China has not only manage to make their Defence forces equipped with some homegrown technology but also manage to capitalize on it by exporting the same to their allied nations and earning invaluable foriegn exchange. This particuler Surface to Air missile in class of S-300 certainly will give maximum edge to those failed nation which doesn't have a creadible deterrance as far as a preventing enemy air attack is concerned. :2guns:
 

ZOOM

Founding Member
Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
577
Likes
11
If you want to get technical, China cannot even make the J-10. They have failed in every modern fighter programme they have ever tried to be completely self-sufficient. We are still making billions selling engines to PLAAF. India is having the same engine problems they are so it is no reason to mock them. DRDO could easily buy engines from GE to run Tejas, but they are trying to be self sufficient from the start.
Vladimir, I am slightly disagreed with you as far as making of J-10 is concerned. It is accepted fact that China has sourced many technologies including engines from Russians but at the same time, we must accept to the fact that China has certainly made a great headway as far as engine development is concerned. Real fact is that, they certainly manage to show their expertise in deploying some of the most modern jets like J-10 and copies of Su-27 in a shortest possible time despite initial set back. Their ability to reverse engineer Su-27 speaks a lot including their engines which is not an easy task.

DRDO has certainly trying to be self sufficient from the start which is a noble one, but what about the quest to bring the fighter jets into the airforce as IAF is suffering from falling number of Jets. During the conflict like situation, nobody will going to talk about self sufficiency or sourcing of technology from abroad. Fact is that, if some conflict breaks out then certainly India has reason to worry despite sweating bullets since last two decades in achiving expertise in Fighter jet technology, China won't require to worry that much.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
Vladimir, I am slightly disagreed with you as far as making of J-10 is concerned. It is accepted fact that China has sourced many technologies including engines from Russians but at the same time, we must accept to the fact that China has certainly made a great headway as far as engine development is concerned. Real fact is that, they certainly manage to show their expertise in deploying some of the most modern jets like J-10 and copies of Su-27 in a shortest possible time despite initial set back. Their ability to reverse engineer Su-27 speaks a lot including their engines which is not an easy task.

DRDO has certainly trying to be self sufficient from the start which is a noble one, but what about the quest to bring the fighter jets into the airforce as IAF is suffering from falling number of Jets. During the conflict like situation, nobody will going to talk about self sufficiency or sourcing of technology from abroad. Fact is that, if some conflict breaks out then certainly India has reason to worry despite sweating bullets since last two decades in achiving expertise in Fighter jet technology, China won't require to worry that much.
They have made progress in most fighter related technologies except the engine. How many J-10s are flying with AL-31 and how many with their WS series? You will see where they are if you look at the numbers.

Reverse engineering of the Su-27 is nothing. It's just manufacturing more Su-27s without license, that's all.
 

Vladimir79

Professional
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
1,404
Likes
82
Vladimir, I am slightly disagreed with you as far as making of J-10 is concerned. It is accepted fact that China has sourced many technologies including engines from Russians but at the same time, we must accept to the fact that China has certainly made a great headway as far as engine development is concerned. Real fact is that, they certainly manage to show their expertise in deploying some of the most modern jets like J-10 and copies of Su-27 in a shortest possible time despite initial set back. Their ability to reverse engineer Su-27 speaks a lot including their engines which is not an easy task.
And what headway has China made in engine development? WS-10 still cannot reach military thrust in a timely manner making it unfieldable. Every J-10 squadron in active-service is fitted with Russian engines. I see no headway except a failed attempt to copy our patented engines.

DRDO has certainly trying to be self sufficient from the start which is a noble one, but what about the quest to bring the fighter jets into the airforce as IAF is suffering from falling number of Jets. During the conflict like situation, nobody will going to talk about self sufficiency or sourcing of technology from abroad. Fact is that, if some conflict breaks out then certainly India has reason to worry despite sweating bullets since last two decades in achiving expertise in Fighter jet technology, China won't require to worry that much.
If China gets into a shooting war those engines are going to need to be overhauled, and at present they still require NPO Saturn to do it for them. If they are attacking Indian targets, we aren't going to do a damned thing for them. They will start falling out of the skies or left to rust in their hangers. Ever notice how WS-10 production keeps getting sidetracked? They were supposed to enter in time for J-10 years ago, now the expected date is pushed back to 2013. Without Russian technical assistance, their planes and missiles won't fly.
 

ppgj

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,029
Likes
168
And what headway has China made in engine development? WS-10 still cannot reach military thrust in a timely manner making it unfieldable. Every J-10 squadron in active-service is fitted with Russian engines. I see no headway except a failed attempt to copy our patented engines.



If China gets into a shooting war those engines are going to need to be overhauled, and at present they still require NPO Saturn to do it for them. If they are attacking Indian targets, we aren't going to do a damned thing for them. They will start falling out of the skies or left to rust in their hangers. Ever notice how WS-10 production keeps getting sidetracked? They were supposed to enter in time for J-10 years ago, now the expected date is pushed back to 2013. Without Russian technical assistance, their planes and missiles won't fly.
well so far WS-10 has not been successful but may be they will get there in sometime which brings us to the point why russians still supply those engines?considering they will compete against you!!it may be a business and bucks now but that is only in short term.what about the long term?
 

Vladimir79

Professional
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
1,404
Likes
82
well so far WS-10 has not been successful but may be they will get there in sometime which brings us to the point why russians still supply those engines?considering they will compete against you!!it may be a business and bucks now but that is only in short term.what about the long term?
The long term is those engines are quickly becoming obsolete. With introduction of 117S and soon PAK FA engines, they will be ancient history. We have no problem exporting something we sell that is better. While China was busy peddling crap J-7s, we were selling MiG-29s. While they peddle their J-11 knock offs, we will be exporting MiG-35, Su-35BM, and PAK FA. A thirty year gap in technology only means they are going to sell to countries that can't buy our equipment anyway ie Pakistan. At least when they buy our engines, we can still take Pak money. China is no competitor to us, they sell 1/40th the amount of arms we do and most of those either go to Pakistan or Afrikan warlords.
 

sayareakd

Mod
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
17,734
Likes
18,951
Country flag
Your eastern enemy had used J-7 to shot down many india jets, I'm sure you can't forget that part.
you sure knows lot about fighters.............

for your kind information, J-7 were inducted by PAF in 1988, after that their is no major war took place where IAF and PAF fought each other.

this fact prima facie shows falsity of your statement.

here is wiki link of PAF for your reference

Pakistan Air Force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

now this forum deserve an appology from you.......
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
To create an efficient R&D process must go with the times. Developing obsolete fighters is not the answer. Learning from others to help your industry get off the ground is how it is done. If you want to go it alone you can play like Iran who tries to reinvent the wheel and ends up with something little better. China wouldn't even have a remotely modern military if it wasn't for Russian exports and technical cooperation. Even we are turning to France for the items we do not have the time to develop. If you are content with a military two generations behind the world leaders, feel free to isolate your industries, if you want cutting edge, you are going to have to cooperate with foreign firms. That is the nature of the global defence complex. Even USA buys foreign technology to stay on top, no one is imune to these realities.
The problem faced by China in not seeking foreign assistance is the various arms embargo placed on China by the US and EU because of the Tiananmen Square incident.

And the Chinese consistently shoot their own feet when it comes to cooperating with Russian firms. The Chinese have enough money, but they are still hell bent on copy pasting just to save a few bucks. In the end they still come out with a sub standard product and cause a lot of bad blood between two old partners.
 

ZOOM

Founding Member
Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
577
Likes
11
They have made progress in most fighter related technologies except the engine. How many J-10s are flying with AL-31 and how many with their WS series? You will see where they are if you look at the numbers.

Reverse engineering of the Su-27 is nothing. It's just manufacturing more Su-27s without license, that's all.


And what headway has China made in engine development? WS-10 still cannot reach military thrust in a timely manner making it unfieldable. Every J-10 squadron in active-service is fitted with Russian engines. I see no headway except a failed attempt to copy our patented engines.

I never said that China has surpass every barrier when it comes to Jet engine development. But their legacy in manufacturing and deploying the same on Jet fighter speaks a lot about their ability in engine development. Accepted WS-10 is not fully ready as it is not giving required thrust as its russian counterpart and still not in line with computerized digital control, but still China has atleast shown that they can still make a headway in developing and deploying WS-10 on their J-10s and Su-27 series jets. It is only a matter of time. Since, reverse engineering complex engine design like AL-31/AL-31F is not an easy task, but still they have certainly shown some resolve in doing the same. In the past as well, many of their jets in currant inventory like J-7, J-8 and host of other jets are now running on reverse engineered copies of Russian jets. I am not saying that China has never failed in reverse engineering as well, but as far as their vintage fighter jets are concerned, they are certainly running on reverse copies. Under such circumstances, even if Russia withdraw its support in engine export then only it will matter very little for them as they will rather looked to run their jets in lower thrust engine, since then only they will posed major challange to any airforce in the region including IAF.



If China gets into a shooting war those engines are going to need to be overhauled, and at present they still require NPO Saturn to do it for them. If they are attacking Indian targets, we aren't going to do a damned thing for them. They will start falling out of the skies or left to rust in their hangers. Ever notice how WS-10 production keeps getting sidetracked? They were supposed to enter in time for J-10 years ago, now the expected date is pushed back to 2013. Without Russian technical assistance, their planes and missiles won't fly.
As far as what I know, Russians are in a Chinese pocket because China is not a country to whom anyone can withdraw its support so easily as far as its Economic might is concerned.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
I never said that China has surpass every barrier when it comes to Jet engine development. But their legacy in manufacturing and deploying the same on Jet fighter speaks a lot about their ability in engine development. Accepted WS-10 is not fully ready as it is not giving required thrust as its russian counterpart and still not in line with computerized digital control, but still China has atleast shown that they can still make a headway in developing and deploying WS-10 on their J-10s and Su-27 series jets. It is only a matter of time. Since, reverse engineering complex engine design like AL-31/AL-31F is not an easy task, but still they have certainly shown some resolve in doing the same. In the past as well, many of their jets in currant inventory like J-7, J-8 and host of other jets are now running on reverse engineered copies of Russian jets. I am not saying that China has never failed in reverse engineering as well, but as far as their vintage fighter jets are concerned, they are certainly running on reverse copies. Under such circumstances, even if Russia withdraw its support in engine export then only it will matter very little for them as they will rather looked to run their jets in lower thrust engine, since then only they will posed major challange to any airforce in the region including IAF.





As far as what I know, Russians are in a Chinese pocket because China is not a country to whom anyone can withdraw its support so easily as far as its Economic might is concerned.
Reverse Engineering is not difficult at all. The Russians gave the Chinese blue prints for the AL-31. Same as us. Right now, we can manufacture more AL-31s in India itself without telling the Russians under a different designation. Copy pasting is neither new nor revolutionary.
 

ZOOM

Founding Member
Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
577
Likes
11
Reverse Engineering is not difficult at all. The Russians gave the Chinese blue prints for the AL-31. Same as us. Right now, we can manufacture more AL-31s in India itself without telling the Russians under a different designation. Copy pasting is neither new nor revolutionary.
In your previous to which I had quoted, you were saying that Russians only provided them with a liceance and now you are saying that Russians have provided them with a blue print and revese engineering is very easier task. If that was the case then why does Russia is concerned about China's allege reverse engineering of their complex weapon system?

And yes, please don't tell me about India's ability to manufacuture AL-31s, we have only granted licence for that and for which we are paying royalty. Please don't talk rubbish.
 

SATISH

DFI Technocrat
Ambassador
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
2,038
Likes
303
Country flag
Well I heard that it is the material science in the engines that make the reverse engineering of the engines hard...there is some thing to do with the crystalline structure of the engine fan blades i suppose...it was a long time back i read this...can some one help me on this?
 

badguy2000

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
March 11, 2009: China is now offering its HQ-9 anti-aircraft missile system for export, as the FD-2000. Mostly used by the army, Chinese HQ-9 brigades are mobile, and equipped with a brigade headquarters (with a command vehicle, and four trucks for communications and maintenance), six battalions (each with a missile control vehicle, a targeting radar vehicle, a search radar vehicle and eight missile launch vehicles, each carry four missiles in containers).
A decade ago, China began introducing the HQ-9. Over a decade of development was believed to have benefitted from data stolen from similar American and Russian systems. The HQ-9 missile is similar to the U.S. "Patriot," and is deployed in ships as well. The radar apparently derived much technology from that used in the Russian S-300 system.

The HQ-9 missile has a max range of about 100 kilometers, weighs 1.3 tons and has a passive (no broadcasting) seeker in the missile. China has installed this system in its new, 6,500 ton 052C class destroyers. The 052C installation has 48 missiles fired from vertical launchers. Unlike the American "hot launch" (where the rocket ignites while the missile is in the launch tube), the Chinese use a "cold launch" system. This uses compressed air to eject the missile from the launch tube, and then the rocket motor ignites. Ship designers are still debating which system is safer and more effective.

Russia and the United States are debating how to deal with the growing Chinese use of stolen technology, especially for weapons systems that are exported and compete against the systems they are copied from.

Air Defense: Another Cheap Chinese Copy
HQ9's radar has nothing to do with Russia's . it was developed completely according to west-style standard.

the radar of HQ9 is much better than Russia's S300 ,but its missles is poorer.

Russia's tech of missile has its traditional edges,just as its tanks.
 

badguy2000

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
The long term is those engines are quickly becoming obsolete. With introduction of 117S and soon PAK FA engines, they will be ancient history. We have no problem exporting something we sell that is better. While China was busy peddling crap J-7s, we were selling MiG-29s. While they peddle their J-11 knock offs, we will be exporting MiG-35, Su-35BM, and PAK FA. A thirty year gap in technology only means they are going to sell to countries that can't buy our equipment anyway ie Pakistan. At least when they buy our engines, we can still take Pak money. China is no competitor to us, they sell 1/40th the amount of arms we do and most of those either go to Pakistan or Afrikan warlords.
well, only time can tell us the finals.

I don't think russia's tech edge can last 10 more years.

let's wait and see.

ecnomy is the base, all others incluidng tech is the upper buildings on it.

without the sustained heavy investment, any R&D is not sustainable,because R&D of defence hightech is soo expensive.

that is why Russia defence tech was left behind by yankee's in 1990s when Russia was banrupty.

today, case is that china has much bigger wallet than Russia's and can invest much more fund on defence R&D than Russian.
Chinese also has built much more modern labs than Russia .
the only thing that chinese needs is just time.
time does stand by chinese ,instead of Russians:blum3:.
 

A.V.

New Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
6,503
Likes
1,157
well, only time can tell us the finals.

I don't think russia's tech edge can last 10 more years.

let's wait and see.

ecnomy is the base, all others incluidng tech is the upper buildings on it.

without the sustained heavy investment, any R&D is not sustainable,because R&D of defence hightech is soo expensive.

that is why Russia defence tech was left behind by yankee's in 1990s when Russia was banrupty.

today, case is that china has much bigger wallet than Russia's and can invest much more fund on defence R&D than Russian.
Chinese also has built much more modern labs than Russia .
the only thing that chinese needs is just time.
time does stand by chinese ,instead of Russians:blum3:.


i understand your point and you may be correct that only time can tell what the outcome will be on the long run
but have a look at the highlighted sentence in your quote its not about havin a big wallet about having the will to do, in that case russia is willing to spend its limited resoures on R&D while china is busy copying the stuff, reverse engineering is not the same a spendin on r&D
when you reverse engineer you do learn something but you always reverse engineer from something to something means some under county already had the tech before and you are playing catch up,
it shows that your would not invent something new you will only be second best but never the best till the will is there and its clearly not there in case of china
 

badguy2000

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
i understand your point and you may be correct that only time can tell what the outcome will be on the long run
but have a look at the highlighted sentence in your quote its not about havin a big wallet about having the will to do, in that case russia is willing to spend its limited resoures on R&D while china is busy copying the stuff, reverse engineering is not the same a spendin on r&D
when you reverse engineer you do learn something but you always reverse engineer from something to something means some under county already had the tech before and you are playing catch up,
it shows that your would not invent something new you will only be second best but never the best till the will is there and its clearly not there in case of china
don't draw a conclusion that chinese only RE in such a hurry.

every county starts from copy+paste...

in fact, Russian did so in 1930s+1950s,didn't it?

Japanese did so in 1950s-1970s,didn't it?

yakee did so earlier, didn't it?

copy+past is a inevitble stage for a latercomer.

people first study walking before you can run.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top