Another Cheap Chinese Copy

F-14

Global Defence Moderator
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
1,563
Likes
27
Both in exports and Industry wise sir the SARAMCO(Saudi Amarican Oil Company) is one of the Super majors in the Oil Industry covering both Up stream Ie production and down stream ie: refinment and Distribution almost half of the Popullation of both expats and saudis are directly or in directly involved with ARAMCO or the general Oil Industry

to put it lay man's terms as an equation : KSA = Oil= $ if the equation is reversed say KSA-Oil then the answer would be No money or developement
 

Vladimir79

Professional
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
1,404
Likes
82
Thing that I don't understand in which direction you are bringing this debate. Yes we can go on on in discussing Chinese R&D and their quality background.
The topic of the thread is "Another Cheap Chinese Copy", I am sticking within the boundaries of that statement.

That is not the point I am making. All I am saying is that, the proven utility of those Chinese reverse engineered technology not only to itself but also to its allies like Pakistan and all other dictatorship regime across the world. I never said that those F-7 had ever shot down any IAF jet, all I am saying that as far as history is concerned(In this case reverse copies of Mig-17 and subsequent use in 1971 war through Pakistan), they have certainly manage to utilize whatever their in their inventory against India, but this time round they used it through Pakistan.
The question regarding F-7 in combat against IAF was used to illustrate the ineffectiveness of Chinese copied weapons. IIRC, India completely routed Pakistan in 1971 only verifying my point. I already admitted they are deadly weapons, but not nearly as combat effective as they would have us believe.

So "Everything China has copies has been inferior in quality", please describe what this sentence is all about. If this was the case, then India should attack China right now and liberate Tibet and its occupied territory, isn't it? because according to you inferior means it won't work during War.
That sentence is all about inferior quality, anything with a Chinese made engine is going to have far reduced servicability and performace than the Russian counterpart. The avionics of Chinese fighters is abysmal relying on 30 year old radars. Just b/c they have incorporated LCD screens and HUD doesn't mean their fighters are "state-of-the art" or more combat capable. The bottom line, if PLAAF got into a serious war, their fighters would quickly come to be grounded or blasted out of the sky by any modern air force.

Hey mate, please please don't get into this irrelavant commenting. You certainly need to go and do some soul searching about China's effort of securing energy resources across the world, at the same time, Arab world is fast diverting its attention towards emerging powers like China from Western nations and willing to lend thier support in every possible way they can. Regarding trump card of Russia, Russia is the sole loser over here to lost one of the biggest consumer of Oil in the world if it ever think about shutting its oil wells to China.
Was I the one who started talking about economies? I am only educating the uninformed of the realities of the Russian economy of which outsiders seem to know little to nothing about.

China is seeking new energy supplies the world over, this is not in question. What you are trying to do is downplay the significant role Russia plays in that equation. Here are a few realities that exist. It is cheaper to transport large amounts of energy over land than by sea. Pipelines are much more efficient and regular than tankers. This reduces the cost for Chinese consumption of Russian and Central Asian supplies, of which we control the flow of most. This makes us the preferred supplier since it is cheaper, more regular, and more secure than sea routes of supply.

In a war with India, Chinese ME routes crossing the Malaca straights would be effectively cut off making their dependence on us a necessity. If we cut our flows combined with an Indian blockade, Chinese capacity would be crippled bringing them to their knees.

As far as Russia being the soul loser, there are plenty of consumers for our energy, EU, US, India, Afrika, and so forth. China has already paid for their supplies 10 years in advance, so we already have ours.
 

Vladimir79

Professional
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
1,404
Likes
82
Both in exports and Industry wise sir the SARAMCO(Saudi Amarican Oil Company) is one of the Super majors in the Oil Industry covering both Up stream Ie production and down stream ie: refinment and Distribution almost half of the Popullation of both expats and saudis are directly or in directly involved with ARAMCO or the general Oil Industry

to put it lay man's terms as an equation : KSA = Oil= $ if the equation is reversed say KSA-Oil then the answer would be No money or developement
I won't argue with that but if I was to include Russian reliance on the petrol sector as opposed to base GDP export comparison it would increase three fold to 15%. What our industries have done is to become leaders in exploration, transportation, and refining technologies which contributes to our economy which are not based on a raw product.
 

badguy2000

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
You have license to produce 80% of the J-11 so it was practically handed to you. There has been no major Chinese innovation or technical skill in copying the technology or production since we gave it to you. What we didn't give you was engine technology and power pack supply and you have so far failed in the endeavour since you have failed engines and are stealing Su-27 power packs.
guy,J11B is a bird different form the licensed version you offered in 1990s.

Of course ,if you insist that J11B be still copied one,because it "looks like su27", then it just prove that you know nothing about aircraft industry.

frankly speaking, J11B in the service of PLA is superor to any bird in the service of Russian air force.

The USA will give us nothing, but we do have access to France, of which their defence companies are giving us their cutting edge. I am sure you have respect for Thales.
you word gave me a attention that in fact Soviet started its defence industry from "copy-paste" before WW II.

Our defence tech is in a process of rebirth, the reasons for the stagnation under the Yeltsin era are well known. As our military faces reformation, so do our industries, of which you will not be able to compete. Even during our dark years China was a non-competitor in the global arms trade.



Do you really know anything about the Russian economy? Our oil exports are around 6% of GDP while Saudi Arabia is more like 40. Our economy is far more diversified than Wahhabis. Your economy is based on EU/US exports, without it your economy would collapse.

I admire you for you still have such confidence on your defence industry,when you started to import France warship .

personally speaking, I quite respect SOviet for its great achievement and do think that it is a great tragedy for such a great superpower to collaspe.

And ,I can understand too that Russian can not accept the fact that Soviet's powerful defence industry has gone with the red-star flag
 

Vladimir79

Professional
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
1,404
Likes
82
guy,J11B is a bird different form the licensed version you offered in 1990s.

Of course ,if you insist that J11B be still copied one,because it "looks like su27", then it just prove that you know nothing about aircraft industry.
Installing Honeywell LCDs doesn't make it an uncopied plane. The J-11Bs already in service are installed with AL-31Fs and 180 engines are still coming. My government is prepared to take legal action against the PRC b/c it is an illegal copy. If you attempt to sell this Chinese rip-off you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of international law and you will face sanctions from the Russian Federation as well as our allies. Engine procurement will cease and your J-10 and J-11 plans will be grounded along with any hope of fielding an aircraft carrier.

frankly speaking, J11B in the service of PLA is superor to any bird in the service of Russian air force.
Russian ministry has already called it an Su-27SK copy. We have people on the ground at Shenyang and our Far East operatives have already broken the smuggling ring for production parts and blue prints so we know exactly what has been stolen. J-11B is a clear generation behind Su-35BM, it doesn't even match up to Su-27SM.

you word gave me a attention that in fact Soviet started its defence industry from "copy-paste" before WW II.
During the Cold War we had access to zero US airframes, much less an actual ToT agreement to copy from.

I admire you for you still have such confidence on your defence industry,when you started to import France warship .
It is called comperative advantage. It is an economic term I doubt you would understand.

personally speaking, I quite respect SOviet for its great achievement and do think that it is a great tragedy for such a great superpower to collaspe.
You respect it yet call it copy and paste. :rolleyes:

And ,I can understand too that Russian can not accept the fact that Soviet's powerful defence industry has gone with the red-star flag
The industry is not gone at all. We still sell 30 times more arms than China and second only to the US. Despite our loss of the Sino markets we are making inroads across the globe and growing despite a global recession. South Amerika and SEA are now our backyard as well as many Arab states including the US puppet SKA. Even NATO is buying billions in Russian equipment. Once we finalise the Venezuelan and SKA contracts this year, our position will be secure. The red-star may be gone, but the Slavic flag remains.
 

ZOOM

Founding Member
Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
577
Likes
11
The topic of the thread is "Another Cheap Chinese Copy", I am sticking within the boundaries of that statement.
I never pointed fingers to your reference and subsequent commenting, I am pointed fingers at unnecessary twisting of my statement in your last post in which you mistakenly assume my statements and said, How many IAF jet shot down by J-7? wasn't that irrlevant.



The question regarding F-7 in combat against IAF was used to illustrate the ineffectiveness of Chinese copied weapons.
Hey mate never in the history F-7 ever faced IAF head on or any other battle and then only you even manage to conclude ineffectiveness of F-7s? how does those F-7 becomes ineffective, isn't it has something to do with your ignorance rather then your consistent blaming of chinese copied weapons?

IIRC, India completely routed Pakistan in 1971 only verifying my point. I already admitted they are deadly weapons, but not nearly as combat effective as they would have us believe.
Please now explain me the difference between phrase "Deadly" and "Combact Effective". Because when weapon systems are deadly then certainly it does translate into combact effective.




That sentence is all about inferior quality, anything with a Chinese made engine is going to have far reduced servicability and performace than the Russian counterpart.
May I need to enlighten you about Russian inferior quality, reduced servicability and performance as far as consistent Mig crashes in IAF inventory is concerned?

The avionics of Chinese fighters is abysmal relying on 30 year old radars. Just b/c they have incorporated LCD screens and HUD doesn't mean their fighters are "state-of-the art" or more combat capable. The bottom line, if PLAAF got into a serious war, their fighters would quickly come to be grounded or blasted out of the sky by any modern air force.
First tell me which radar is so old in Chinese fighters? certainly those equipped in Su-27s and J-10 cannot be that much old? then we will proceed further and discuss about PLAAF's capability in serious war.


Was I the one who started talking about economies? I am only educating the uninformed of the realities of the Russian economy of which outsiders seem to know little to nothing about.
Ignorant Souls always aims for the Moon and in your case this quote makes it point so clearly. I never got into the comparisons of Chinese and russians economy. All I wanted to enlighten some less informed souls about their immaturity in making far less immature statements like "Russia hold the trump card and it can cripple China by just shutting down its Oil Tap"

Ha ha ha ha, what a statement, heck even Russian themselves laugh out loud once they listen about such immature statement.

And yes reason for bringing Chinese economy comes from the fact that, in your previous post you said that Chinese fighter jet will comes down to ground from the air once Russia stop supply of AL-41 engines. Russians cannot even properly protest china's allege reverse engineering of Russian Defence equipment, so how the hell you even braught such out of the box idea of crippling Chinese economy by shutting the oil tap and restraining supply of engine?


China is seeking new energy supplies the world over, this is not in question. What you are trying to do is downplay the significant role Russia plays in that equation. Here are a few realities that exist. It is cheaper to transport large amounts of energy over land than by sea. Pipelines are much more efficient and regular than tankers. This reduces the cost for Chinese consumption of Russian and Central Asian supplies, of which we control the flow of most. This makes us the preferred supplier since it is cheaper, more regular, and more secure than sea routes of supply.
I never downplay Russian role in Chinese economy, all I was pointing fingers at some of your ignorant post as I have presented above.

In a war with India, Chinese ME routes crossing the Malaca straights would be effectively cut off making their dependence on us a necessity. If we cut our flows combined with an Indian blockade, Chinese capacity would be crippled bringing them to their knees.
Oh mate, you have literally braught our debate into the realm of something like World War like scenario where two countries crippling China.

Yawn, Are you talking about Indian blockade? huh!, Indian Government cannot even talk openly about intrusion of its Border by chinese troop fearing consequences it require to face in future. Blocking Chinese oil route in Indian ocean by India is so far fetch idea.

As far as Russia being the soul loser, there are plenty of consumers for our energy, EU, US, India, Afrika, and so forth. China has already paid for their supplies 10 years in advance, so we already have ours.
Oh really, so they have paid forth supplies in advance, then certainly you must go through the idea of selling the same oil at $200 per barrel, since now you have receive their payment in advance, isn;t that a good idea.
 

musalman

پاکستان زنده باد
Regular Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
923
Likes
135
Country flag
Even during 1971 war, China had trasferred many reverse engineered copies of Mig-17 to pakistan although they were not as good as Russian one as far as engine thrust is concerned, even some of them had only limited lifespan of 100 hrs as far as their engine life is concered, but those Mig-17s were successfully used by Pakistan by configuring them with US made Air to Air missiles against IAF.
J6 shot down Indian Mig 21 using US sidewinder
 

Vladimir79

Professional
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
1,404
Likes
82
I never pointed fingers to your reference and subsequent commenting, I am pointed fingers at unnecessary twisting of my statement in your last post in which you mistakenly assume my statements and said, How many IAF jet shot down by J-7? wasn't that irrlevant.

Hey mate never in the history F-7 ever faced IAF head on or any other battle and then only you even manage to conclude ineffectiveness of F-7s? how does those F-7 becomes ineffective, isn't it has something to do with your ignorance rather then your consistent blaming of chinese copied weapons?[
How is asking you a question twisting your statement? You have much to learn about the use of sarcasm. The point of it was to illustrate their undeserved reputation. Looking at PAF ejection history, the F-7 has not been kind to them in reliability.


Please now explain me the difference between phrase "Deadly" and "Combact Effective". Because when weapon systems are deadly then certainly it does translate into combact effective.
Deadly means they can kill, combat effective means they are relavent on the modern battlefield of which they are not.


May I need to enlighten you about Russian inferior quality, reduced servicability and performance as far as consistent Mig crashes in IAF inventory is concerned?
Blame your own people for those issues. It doesn't have anything to do with us. We discontinued that series 25 years ago and can't be expected to provide service for antiquated machines. If you have issues with MiG-29 and Su-30 then we can talk. Are you unhappy with these planes?

First tell me which radar is so old in Chinese fighters? certainly those equipped in Su-27s and J-10 cannot be that much old? then we will proceed further and discuss about PLAAF's capability in serious war.
Come now, you expect us to believe Chinese hype when Pakistan doesn't even buy it? Every fighter exported to them is getting Italian radar that was cutting edge 20 years ago which means Chinese equals less than that.

Ignorant Souls always aims for the Moon and in your case this quote makes it point so clearly. I never got into the comparisons of Chinese and russians economy. All I wanted to enlighten some less informed souls about their immaturity in making far less immature statements like "Russia hold the trump card and it can cripple China by just shutting down its Oil Tap"
You're the one who stuck his nose into badguy2000's nationalistic rant. If you don't want to play then get off the field.

Ha ha ha ha, what a statement, heck even Russian themselves laugh out loud once they listen about such immature statement.
You know more about the Russian economy than I do? yxaxa!

And yes reason for bringing Chinese economy comes from the fact that, in your previous post you said that Chinese fighter jet will comes down to ground from the air once Russia stop supply of AL-41 engines.
AL-41? I am sure you meant AL-31F. The Chinese economy has nothing to do with that statement. That was in regards to them stealing our patents. The economics with you and I stems from your comment that Russia is in the "Chinese pocket" due to economic reliance. We can easily stop importing their contaminated food and toys that kills our pets and children. They are rioting in the streets themselves due to poor quality control that is indicative of their manufacture.

Russians cannot even properly protest china's allege reverse engineering of Russian Defence equipment, so how the hell you even braught such out of the box idea of crippling Chinese economy by shutting the oil tap and restraining supply of engine?
You brought out the idea by saying we are more reliant on them as I quote again "Russia is in Chinese pocket."

I never downplay Russian role in Chinese economy, all I was pointing fingers at some of your ignorant post as I have presented above.
You said we are in China's pocket. That is the ignorant statement I was responding to.

Oh mate, you have literally braught our debate into the realm of something like World War like scenario where two countries crippling China.
War between China and India at some point is likely. One of these days China is going to go much further than spray painting Indian rocks and they will have to respond. It is good to know where one stands in such a case.

Yawn, Are you talking about Indian blockade? huh!, Indian Government cannot even talk openly about intrusion of its Border by chinese troop fearing consequences it require to face in future. Blocking Chinese oil route in Indian ocean by India is so far fetch idea.
Indian Army fears China attack by 2017- Hindustan Times

Oh really, so they have paid forth supplies in advance, then certainly you must go through the idea of selling the same oil at $200 per barrel, since now you have receive their payment in advance, isn;t that a good idea.
If China attacks India, we will take whatever measures are necessary to aid our friends.
 

hbogyt

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
231
Likes
11
re

The topic of the thread is "Another Cheap Chinese Copy", I am sticking within the boundaries of that statement.



The question regarding F-7 in combat against IAF was used to illustrate the ineffectiveness of Chinese copied weapons. IIRC, India completely routed Pakistan in 1971 only verifying my point. I already admitted they are deadly weapons, but not nearly as combat effective as they would have us believe.



That sentence is all about inferior quality, anything with a Chinese made engine is going to have far reduced servicability and performace than the Russian counterpart. The avionics of Chinese fighters is abysmal relying on 30 year old radars. Just b/c they have incorporated LCD screens and HUD doesn't mean their fighters are "state-of-the art" or more combat capable. The bottom line, if PLAAF got into a serious war, their fighters would quickly come to be grounded or blasted out of the sky by any modern air force.



Was I the one who started talking about economies? I am only educating the uninformed of the realities of the Russian economy of which outsiders seem to know little to nothing about.

China is seeking new energy supplies the world over, this is not in question. What you are trying to do is downplay the significant role Russia plays in that equation. Here are a few realities that exist. It is cheaper to transport large amounts of energy over land than by sea. Pipelines are much more efficient and regular than tankers. This reduces the cost for Chinese consumption of Russian and Central Asian supplies, of which we control the flow of most. This makes us the preferred supplier since it is cheaper, more regular, and more secure than sea routes of supply.

In a war with India, Chinese ME routes crossing the Malaca straights would be effectively cut off making their dependence on us a necessity. If we cut our flows combined with an Indian blockade, Chinese capacity would be crippled bringing them to their knees.
As far as Russia being the soul loser, there are plenty of consumers for our energy, EU, US, India, Afrika, and so forth. China has already paid for their supplies 10 years in advance, so we already have ours.
"You can't be serious man! You canNOT be serious."-----John Macnroe

What counterpart engine are you talking about? WS-10A is based on American designed core.

The only 30 year old radar in the Chinese air force is on your Su-27SKs and Su-30MKKs(both use twist cassegrain), barring the older J-7 and J-8s. Even J-7P has a planar array.

As per OOE, it is very difficult for the Indians to cut off the oil supplies in the sea. Even if they managed that, China would still have many options: 1. Strategic oil reserve. 2. War time organisation and reduced oil consumption for civilian use. 3. China produces oil itself. 4. Get oil from Russia who would more likely make money off both sides.

The military can be guaranteed their oil supply.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
What counterpart engine are you talking about? WS-10A is based on American designed core.
No its not. You cannot rip off American or European engines without ToT. It will never happen even if you manufacture Airbus or Boeing planes later in the future. Don't forget you are still under a US and EU led arms embargo since 1989. China only has access to the Russian Al-31, the ancient version.

The only 30 year old radar in the Chinese air force is on your Su-27SKs and Su-30MKKs(both use twist cassegrain), barring the older J-7 and J-8s. Even J-7P has a planar array.
The quality of antennas and other systems are far inferior to anything else present in the market. It is well known that the Italian Grifo radar is ancient. PAF opted for a radar that is effectively many generations behind any Russian radar, that too by rejecting a "modern" Chinese radar.

As per OOE, it is very difficult for the Indians to cut off the oil supplies in the sea. Even if they managed that, China would still have many options: 1. Strategic oil reserve. 2. War time organisation and reduced oil consumption for civilian use. 3. China produces oil itself. 4. Get oil from Russia who would more likely make money off both sides.

The military can be guaranteed their oil supply.
In a way it is possible. Your military may not be stopped. But, look at the effect it will have on your economy. PLA may ration oil usage for civilian purposes. Bar cargo ships from operating at full capacity to save fuel. Even you will not be able to drive your car to school or work without having to pay effectively 10 times the current market prices for fuel. And most of the times you will have to live in the dark since your power plants will be shut down for the war effort. All this will lead to inflation since food products will not reach cities in time because of shortage of oil.
 

badguy2000

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
No its not. You cannot rip off American or European engines without ToT. It will never happen even if you manufacture Airbus or Boeing planes later in the future. Don't forget you are still under a US and EU led arms embargo since 1989. China only has access to the Russian Al-31, the ancient version.
for the sake of god, pls don't expose you ignornace here.ok?

it is almost a open secret that WS10 is based on the core of CfM56 ,the civilian variety of one yankee's engine..

it has nothing to do with Russian. of course ,many russians still insist that all CHinese weapons should be copies of Russian's, because it makes them happy.


BTW, most indians like you seems not to insist that RE be just "copy+paste" ....obvously that is why India can not succeed in "RE"
 

ppgj

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,029
Likes
168
BTW, most indians like you seems not to insist that RE be just "copy+paste" ....obvously that is why India can not succeed in "RE"
to a fair extent you are right that china has been successful in reverse engineering but to say that india can't do that is laughable.india does not do that 'cos they want the latest technology.
 

badguy2000

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
to a fair extent you are right that china has been successful in reverse engineering but to say that india can't do that is laughable.india does not do that 'cos they want the latest technology.
I can feel some sour grape
 

hbogyt

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
231
Likes
11
re

No its not. You cannot rip off American or European engines without ToT. It will never happen even if you manufacture Airbus or Boeing planes later in the future. Don't forget you are still under a US and EU led arms embargo since 1989. China only has access to the Russian Al-31, the ancient version.



The quality of antennas and other systems are far inferior to anything else present in the market. It is well known that the Italian Grifo radar is ancient. PAF opted for a radar that is effectively many generations behind any Russian radar, that too by rejecting a "modern" Chinese radar.



In a way it is possible. Your military may not be stopped. But, look at the effect it will have on your economy. PLA may ration oil usage for civilian purposes. Bar cargo ships from operating at full capacity to save fuel. Even you will not be able to drive your car to school or work without having to pay effectively 10 times the current market prices for fuel. And most of the times you will have to live in the dark since your power plants will be shut down for the war effort. All this will lead to inflation since food products will not reach cities in time because of shortage of oil.
WS-10A is only based on an American core. Everything else in it is indidenously developed. China had WS-10 before it got its hands on Al-31. The earliest prototypes of J-10 all had WS-10.

What radar are the Pakistanis using now? Chinese perhaps. Tell me when they have actually installed those Italian ones. Besides, do you not think that the Italians would have improved the radar for export just as China did for F-7?

All that predicates on that you somehow cut off Chinese external oil supply. Assuming you have, it would present a fantasic opportunity for alternative energy industry. Power plants won't shut down because they burn coal, which China has plenty of. We can still allocate oil for food transport, we just have to cut down on wastage like travelling.


Edit: There would not be any inflation due to wartime price control. Even without such, the problem would not cause any major headache because it is not underlying inflation meaning it doesn't present any ongoing problem.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
for the sake of god, pls don't expose you ignornace here.ok?

it is almost a open secret that WS10 is based on the core of CfM56 ,the civilian variety of one yankee's engine..

it has nothing to do with Russian. of course ,many russians still insist that all CHinese weapons should be copies of Russian's, because it makes them happy.


BTW, most indians like you seems not to insist that RE be just "copy+paste" ....obvously that is why India can not succeed in "RE"
No its not. You don't have ToT for the CFM-56. Just because your airline companies use the CFM-56 does not mean you were able to design and build a military engine based on a civilian engine at a time when the Chinese engine R&D was at its nascent stage. especially without ToT.

Don't forget that you have had almost 0 military contacts with the west after 1989. China only had access to Russian weaponry after 1989.
 

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
WS-10A is only based on an American core. Everything else in it is indidenously developed. China had WS-10 before it got its hands on Al-31. The earliest prototypes of J-10 all had WS-10.
The Chinese announced the capability to make the WS-10 only after 2006, 8 years after the Russians supplied the Al-31. J-10 production started in 2003-04. The J-10s have been using Al-31s since the beginning. Till date there has not been a single recorded WS-10 flight test on a J-10.

What radar are the Pakistanis using now? Chinese perhaps. Tell me when they have actually installed those Italian ones. Besides, do you not think that the Italians would have improved the radar for export just as China did for F-7?
The JF-17 is barely ready for serial production. The radar for the JF-17 is still not ready and will not be ready for another year or two. The Italians have made improvements to the radar, but its modest. It cannot even match the French RDY-3 which is a generation ahead.

All that predicates on that you somehow cut off Chinese external oil supply. Assuming you have, it would present a fantasic opportunity for alternative energy industry.
Well, your access to Middle East oil will be hampered. If the Russians cut off supply then imports will reduce drastically. Anyways, even if we cut off your supply of oil, it doesn't mean that alternative sources will get a big boost in the short run. It will take years to build an alternate supply.

Power plants won't shut down because they burn coal, which China has plenty of.
And how are you going to transport coal to the thermal plants? And how will you run your generators in the coal mines without fuel?

We can still allocate oil for food transport, we just have to cut down on wastage like travelling.
Give that as a reason to your boss on why you stopped coming to work. Your Trucks will suffer a lot due to shortage of fuel.

Edit: There would not be any inflation due to wartime price control. Even without such, the problem would not cause any major headache because it is not underlying inflation meaning it doesn't present any ongoing problem.
Dude, a single truckers strike in India for a day seriously cripples our cities. Have you ever thought from where you get your city gets food and electricity from? Food prices suddenly sky rocket for more than 3 days because of that. Lack of fuel is all that is needed for an entire economy to collapse.
 

badguy2000

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
No its not. You don't have ToT for the CFM-56. Just because your airline companies use the CFM-56 does not mean you were able to design and build a military engine based on a civilian engine at a time when the Chinese engine R&D was at its nascent stage. especially without ToT.

Don't forget that you have had almost 0 military contacts with the west after 1989. China only had access to Russian weaponry after 1989.
budddy,chinese did finished many RE without any TOT.

if there is TOT ,then it is not "RE" .but "license production"
 

badguy2000

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
The Chinese announced the capability to make the WS-10 only after 2006, 8 years after the Russians supplied the Al-31. J-10 production started in 2003-04. The J-10s have been using Al-31s since the beginning. Till date there has not been a single recorded WS-10 flight test on a J-10.
WS10 started in mid 1980s, when Chinese got some CFM56 from Yankees.

Chinese RE the core engine of CFMF 56,then had it as the base of WS10.

guy, to develope a engine always takes decades .

as a new engine, WS10's reliablity needs proving, that is why WS10 is fixed on double-engined J11B,instead of single-engined J10.
 

badguy2000

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
Well, your access to Middle East oil will be hampered. If the Russians cut off supply then imports will reduce drastically. Anyways, even if we cut off your supply of oil, it doesn't mean that alternative sources will get a big boost in the short run. It will take years to build an alternate supply.



And how are you going to transport coal to the thermal plants? And how will you run your generators in the coal mines without fuel?
CHinese itself is the global 5th or 6th biggest oil producer and its indigenious oil is enough to mantain most of industry activity.

besides, CHina has the tech to change coal into oil.in fact, the global biggest coal-to-oil plant is in Inner mongolia.

the bottomline is that most chinese might have to give up their cars and commute by bus or subway and face infaltion,if extenor oil resource is cut off. but most industry activity and military actitiy would still be ok.
 

hit&run

United States of Hindu Empire
Mod
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
14,104
Likes
63,370
Fueling the dragon: China's race into the oil market, by Gal Luft
welcome to earth,
Reality bites
This will clear chines claims that they will run their economy by converting coal into oil.

Fueling the dragon: China's race into the oil market

With 1.3 billion people, the People's Republic of China is the world's most populous country and the second largest oil consumer, behind the U.S. In recent years, China has been undergoing a process of industrialization and is one of the fastest growing economies in the world. With real gross domestic product growing at a rate of 8-10% a year, China's need for energy is projected to increase by 150 percent by 2020. to sustain its growth China requires increasing amounts of oil. Its oil consumption grows by 7.5% per year, seven times faster than the U.S.'
Growth in Chinese oil consumption has accelerated mainly because of a large-scale transition away from bicycles and mass transit toward private automobiles, more affordable since China's admission to the World Trade Organization. Consequently, by year 2010 China is expected to have 90 times more cars than in 1990. With automobile numbers growing at 19% a year, projections show that China could surpass the total number of cars in the U.S. by 2030. Another contributor to the sharp increase in automobile sales is the very low price of gasoline in China. Chinese gasoline prices now rank among the lowest in the world for oil-importing countries, and are a third of retail prices in Europe and Japan, where steep taxes are imposed to discourage gasoline use.

Where will China get its oil?
China’s ability to provide for its own needs is limited by the fact that its proven oil reserves are small in relation to its consumption. At current production rates they are likely to last for less than two decades. Though during the 1970s and 1980s China was a net oil exporter, it became a net oil importer in 1993 and is growingly dependent on foreign oil. China currently imports 32% of its oil and is expected to double its need for imported oil between now and 2010. A report by the International Energy Agency predicted that by 2030, Chinese oil imports will equal imports by the U.S. today.

China's expectation of growing future dependence on oil imports has brought it to acquire interests in exploration and production in places like Kazakhstan, Russia, Venezuela, Sudan, West Africa, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Canada. But despite its efforts to diversify its sources, China has become increasingly dependent on Middle East oil. Today, 58% of China's oil imports come from the region. By 2015, the share of Middle East oil will stand on 70%. Though historically China has had no long-standing strategic interests in the Middle East, its relationship with the region from where most of its oil comes is becoming increasingly important.

Implications for U.S.-China relations
U.S.-China relations are influenced by a wide array of issues from Taiwan to trade relations and human rights. But undoubtedly access to Middle East oil will become a key issue in the relations between the two powers. Clearly, in the short term, China recognizes that its energy security is increasingly dependent on cooperation with the U.S., rather than competition with it. China would like to maintain good relations with the U.S. and enjoy the economic benefits derived from such cooperation. But this inclination is balanced by the feeling among many Chinese leaders that the U.S. seeks to dominate the Persian Gulf in order to exercise control over its energy resources and that it tries to contain China's aspirations in the region. The U.S. is therefore considered a major threat to China's long-term energy security.
Although China is banking on oil development projects outside the Middle East, Beijing most likely will insist on nurturing its relations with the main oil-producing states in that region as an insurance policy. But its attempts to gain a foothold in the Middle East and build up a long-term strategic links with countries hostile to the U.S. could also bear heavily on U.S.-China relations. Especially troubling are China's arms sales to the region, its support of state sponsors of terrorism and its proliferation of dual use technology.
A report by the U.S.-China Security Review Commission, a group created by Congress, warned that China's increasing need for imported energy has given it an incentive to become closer to countries supporting terrorism like Iran, Iraq and Sudan:
"A key driver in China's relations with terrorist-sponsoring governments is its dependence on foreign oil to fuel its economic development. This dependency is expected to increase over the coming decade."
China's relations with state sponsors of terrorism has provided these countries a great deal of money, allowing them to continue to harbor terrorist organizations and to maintain a policy of oppression and exploitation of their people. China is the number one oil and gas importer from Iran. The two countries are bound by energy deals reaching a total value of $120 billion and growing. While the U.S. and EU were forging a diplomatic strategy to halt Iran’s nuclear program, China signed in October 2004 its largest energy deal with Iran ever and promised to block any American attempt to refer Iran’s nuclear program to the UN Security Council. This may indicate not only that China is interested in a militarily strong, even nuclear Iran that dominates the Gulf but also that for China, energy security considerations trump international cooperation on critical global security issues. In addition to its special relations with Iran, China is also known to be a provider of WMD technologies to rouge states including North Korea, Syria, Libya and Sudan.

China also provides conventional weapons that could threaten U.S. military forces securing the Persian Gulf. Of particular concern are China's sales to Iran of anti-ship cruise missiles, which pose a threat to oil tanker traffic and American naval vessels operating there. This arms trafficking presents an increasing threat to U.S. global security interests, particularly in the Middle East and Asia.

A key component of China's strategy to guarantee access to Persian Gulf oil is the special relations it has cultivated with Saudi Arabia. The ties with Riyadh go back to the mid-1980s when China sold Saudi Arabia intermediate range ballistic missiles. Since then, the relations have grown closer. High-level visits of Chinese leaders to Saudi Arabia culminated in 1999 with President Jiang Zemin's state visit in which he pronounced a "strategic oil partnership" between the two countries. China has offered to sell the Saudis intercontinental ballistic missiles. The Saudis have so far preferred to turn down many of the proposals and limit their procurement from China in order to maintain their special relations with the U.S. But continuous deterioration in Saudi-American relations or, in the longer run, a regime change in the oil kingdom, could drive the Saudis to end their reliance on the U.S. as the sole guarantor of their regime's security and offer China an expanded role.

Outside of the Middle East, China’s pursuit of oil could undercut U.S. security interests on multiple fronts: In the South China Sea, China is involved in territorial disputes with Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, Vietnam and Brunei over access to energy in the Spratly and Paracel Islands. In the East China Sea, where rich oil and gas reserves are believed to exist, rivalry is developing between China and Japan over access to energy resources. China has already begun the exploring process for gas reserves on its side of the East China Sea. The Japanese government claims that some of the reserves are actually on its side of the demarcation line and has accused China of attempting to extract hydrocarbons from its water. It also allowed its own oil firms to drill in the disputed territories—a move considered a provocation by China. Another source of tension is access to Russian oil. For many months, China and Japan have been involved in a bidding war over a major pipeline deal to deliver Russian oil from Eastern Siberia. China’s plan calls for a pipeline running to the Manchurian city of Daqing, while Japan is insisting on a pipeline that would run to Nakhodka, the Russian coastal area opposite to Japan. This tense atmosphere is feeding popular and political animosity, which have already resulted in a wave of violent anti-Japanese demonstrations in April 2005, and are likely to deepen over time. In Africa Chinese oil companies turn a blind eye to the way petrodollars are used by the local governments. One place where such indifference impacts America’s effort to fight against corruption and human rights abuse is Sudan. The Chinese have invested more than $8 billion in joint exploration contracts in this country, including the building of a 900-mile pipeline to the Red Sea, deployed thousands of military personnel disguised as oil workers and provided arms to the Sudanese government to support it in the country's 20-year civil war. In September 2004, the United Nations Security Council passed resolution 1564, threatening Sudan with oil sanctions unless it curbed its support for belligerent militia groups in Darfur. To protect its oil interests in Sudan, which supplies seven percent of China’s oil imports, Beijing stated very clearly that it would veto any bid to impose such sanctions. In the Western Hemisphere China concluded oil and gas deals with Argentina, Brazil, Peru, and Ecuador. But its main country of interest is Venezuela, U.S.' fourth largest oil supplier. A series of oil agreements signed in early 2005 allow Chinese companies to explore for oil and gas and set up refineries in Venezuela. Chinese state-owned oil companies have also begun seeking ambitious oil deals in Canada, the top petroleum supplier to the U.S. China’s continued penetration into the Western Hemisphere could have profound economic and political implications for the U.S. Considering the fact that both U.S.’ and Mexico’s domestic crude production are falling, the U.S. cannot afford to lose chunks of the crude produced by the two countries that together supply a third of its oil imports. With less oil available to the American market the U.S. will be forced to seek this oil elsewhere, primarily in the Middle East, hence becoming more dependnet on this tumultuous region.

This IAGS Spotlight was written by Gal Luft

Further reading:
In Search for Crude China Goes to the Americas
US, China Are on Collision Course Over Oil
Commentary Magazine: The Sino-Saudi Connection
RAND: China's Quest for Energy Security
The Jamestown Foundation: The Sino-Saudi Connection
From Malacca to Hormuz: Chinese Energy Sea Lane Security

The Nixon Center: The U.S.-China Relationship facing international security crises: Three Case Studies in post-9/11 bilateral relations
Monograph Introduction, Monograph Chapters
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top