Russia ready to sell Su-35 fighter jets to China

p2prada

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2009
Messages
10,234
Likes
4,015
Hmm. Seems like China is struggling with engines. Hasn't the WS-15 been in development since 1990? Also, the older WS models aren't even ready yet.

Also, the AL-31Fs sourced from Russia for the J-11s aren't enough to power any new 5th gen development hence the need for the 117S.

As long as the engines aren't ready, there is nothing to fear in the new aircraft. We are ahead of the game wrt PAKFA.
 

kuku

Respected Member
Regular Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
510
Likes
10
Country flag
PRC is more inclined towards getting specific technologies from Russia that they themslves are not currently successful in producing: design consulting, Engines, radars, missile seekers etc.

Russia wants to sell complete packages for high end technology and will play tough till they buy a big weapons package to release big ticket items, they know PRC has no option.

If Russia is not able to innovate (something PRC is unable to) into new technology that leads the current world tech. or atleast the tech available to PRC, it will loose all its hopes of selling stuff to PRC.

The problem is PRC is not a low tech nation in manufacturing, it can reverse engineer any Russian product as soon as the recieve the very first russian product, and they can even improve/adapt the product to their requirements, afterwards they can cancel the complete weapons deal and continue manufacturing what they require, like they did with the J-11 program, Russia will not be able to do much against that.

Chances of PRC inducting Su-35, when they have the customized J-11B for the same role (heavy twin engined multi role), are very limited, The advantage that Su-35 gives in performance over the J-11B might be significant, however doesn't seem to be required by PLA-AF (not significant enough for them).

I think PRC will never buy another fighter from Russia, that age is gone, and Russia helped in bringing about change. If Russia can not offer any new innovations to PRC that market is closed (they can manufacture improved versions of the Russian gear they buy themselves).
 
Last edited:

tony4562

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
836
Likes
49
People tend to vastly exaggerate the capabilities of Russia weapons all the time, sometimes out of fear but most often intentionally. Usually it's the military analysts and think tankers who, often acting upon interests of defense contractors, would leak to the media about how superior the upcoming russian weapons are, the media then immediately catches the bait, and before you know it's all over the news and this russian superiority becomes established fact. They did this to Mig21, Mig23, Mig25, Mig29 and now the supposed F22 rival. Whats people don't know is that Russia or its predecessor Soviet Union, has been way behind the west in virtually every kind of industry. Thus to make something comparable to western products, the russian scientists/engineers often have no choice but to cut corners often at costs of reliability, life span, etc. And the specs of the final product are often bloated way beyond reasonable. I remember after an Iraqi Mig21 defected to Israel in 1966, at which time Mig21 was a state-of-the-art aircraft and a mystery to the west, western engineers took it apart and to their surprise they found the power plant (R-11) of the Mig21, to be a very crude engine made up of only 2000 components. It's contemporary equivalent in the west, the J79 on the other hadn, had 20000 components. They concluded that R-11 could be made by pre-WWII technologies. That's the reality of russian engineering. I have seen components such as hydraulic systems on russia's prized Su27, they just don't even come close to western standards. I think that's one reason China was able to reverse-engineer Su27 in so short frame of time.

I for one think neither Russia nor China are really in the hunt for a true 5th generation fighter. F22 costed whorpping 70 billion dollars to develop, F35 is likely to exceed that. Russia currently does not have this kind of money. China on the other hand has the money, but not the expwerience. And neither have the cutting edge technologies or advanced manufacturing processes to make a fighter with true stealthness, the single most important criterion of a 5th generation fighter. PAK-FA will be an improved Su27/30/35, and J-XX will be an improved (twin-engined) J10, and neither will come near the capabilities of F22.
 
Last edited:

Tshering22

Sikkimese Saber
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
7,869
Likes
23,213
Country flag
People tend to vastly exaggerate the capabilities of Russia weapons all the time, sometimes out of fear but most often intentionally. Usually it's the military analysts and think tankers who, often acting upon interests of defense contractors, would leak to the media about how superior the upcoming russian weapons are, the media then immediately catches the bait, and before you know it's all over the news and this russian superiority becomes established fact. They did this to Mig21, Mig23, Mig25, Mig29 and now the supposed F22 rival. Whats people don't know is that Russia or its predecessor Soviet Union, has been way behind the west in virtually every kind of industry. Thus to make something comparable to western products, the russian scientists/engineers often have no choice but to cut corners often at costs of reliability, life span, etc. And the specs of the final product are often bloated way beyond reasonable. I remember after an Iraqi Mig21 defected to Israel in 1966, at which time Mig21 was a state-of-the-art aircraft and a mystery to the west, western engineers took it apart and to their surprise they found the power plant (R-11) of the Mig21, to be a very crude engine made up of only 2000 components. It's contemporary equivalent in the west, the J79 on the other hadn, had 20000 components. They concluded that R-11 could be made by pre-WWII technologies. That's the reality of russian engineering. I have seen components such as hydraulic systems on russia's prized Su27, they just don't even come close to western standards. I think that's one reason China was able to reverse-engineer Su27 in so short frame of time.

I for one think neither Russia nor China are really in the hunt for a true 5th generation fighter. F22 costed whorpping 70 billion dollars to develop, F35 is likely to exceed that. Russia currently does not have this kind of money. China on the other hand has the money, but not the expwerience. And neither have the cutting edge technologies or advanced manufacturing processes to make a fighter with true stealthness, the single most important criterion of a 5th generation fighter. PAK-FA will be an improved Su27/30/35, and J-XX will be an improved (twin-engined) J10, and neither will come near the capabilities of F22.
Agreed. But then again neither Russia, China or India need that kind of stealth which keeps the jet's maintenance costs at $ 55,000 after every flight and 12 hours in hangar. Only US can afford that at the moment. China can afford it but as you said, technology is not evolved to that level. PAKFA/JXX/FGFA/AMCA are all a try towards reaching Raptor's level or even coming close to it, keeping costs low.

None of these 5th gen jets would be in Raptor's league truly but certainly they would be superior to all the 4.5th gen jets that US, Europe, Russia, China, India etc have or intend to have en masse.
 

kuku

Respected Member
Regular Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
510
Likes
10
Country flag
I think its more about the systems and sensors on the airplane and in the military they serve in more than the 'stealth'. The stealth itself was an answer to increasingly difficult to penetrate soviet air defence network, that was evolving at a rate faster than any other countermeasures could.
 

mattster

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
1,171
Likes
870
Country flag
People tend to vastly exaggerate the capabilities of Russia weapons all the time, sometimes out of fear but most often intentionally. Usually it's the military analysts and think tankers who, often acting upon interests of defense contractors, would leak to the media about how superior the upcoming russian weapons are, the media then immediately catches the bait, and before you know it's all over the news and this russian superiority becomes established fact. They did this to Mig21, Mig23, Mig25, Mig29 and now the supposed F22 rival. Whats people don't know is that Russia or its predecessor Soviet Union, has been way behind the west in virtually every kind of industry. Thus to make something comparable to western products, the russian scientists/engineers often have no choice but to cut corners often at costs of reliability, life span, etc. And the specs of the final product are often bloated way beyond reasonable. I remember after an Iraqi Mig21 defected to Israel in 1966, at which time Mig21 was a state-of-the-art aircraft and a mystery to the west, western engineers took it apart and to their surprise they found the power plant (R-11) of the Mig21, to be a very crude engine made up of only 2000 components. It's contemporary equivalent in the west, the J79 on the other hadn, had 20000 components. They concluded that R-11 could be made by pre-WWII technologies. That's the reality of russian engineering. I have seen components such as hydraulic systems on russia's prized Su27, they just don't even come close to western standards. I think that's one reason China was able to reverse-engineer Su27 in so short frame of time.

I for one think neither Russia nor China are really in the hunt for a true 5th generation fighter. F22 costed whorpping 70 billion dollars to develop, F35 is likely to exceed that. Russia currently does not have this kind of money. China on the other hand has the money, but not the expwerience. And neither have the cutting edge technologies or advanced manufacturing processes to make a fighter with true stealthness, the single most important criterion of a 5th generation fighter. PAK-FA will be an improved Su27/30/35, and J-XX will be an improved (twin-engined) J10, and neither will come near the capabilities of F22.
Completely agree with your comment. The Soviets have always been good at the theoretical physics/science and math, but they have fallen so far behind in electronics, manufacturing technology and industrial infrastructure/base. Likewise your comments on the PAK-FA - I think that the PAK-FA that will out of production in 5 years will be no match for the F-22 that is flying today.

This is why the Indian Defense planners are wisely and slowly moving away from Russian equipment. They have no choice in the matter despite the fact that the Russians are willing to sign all kinds of joint development schemes. There are still areas that Russia is good at; but they are in a position where they have to limit their R&D investment in a few key areas.

India needs to look to Europe and US for most of the next generation systems and gradually get rid of its old high maintenance Soviet equipment.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
People tend to vastly exaggerate the capabilities of Russia weapons all the time, sometimes out of fear but most often intentionally. Usually it's the military analysts and think tankers who, often acting upon interests of defense contractors, would leak to the media about how superior the upcoming russian weapons are, the media then immediately catches the bait, and before you know it's all over the news and this russian superiority becomes established fact. They did this to Mig21, Mig23, Mig25, Mig29 and now the supposed F22 rival. Whats people don't know is that Russia or its predecessor Soviet Union, has been way behind the west in virtually every kind of industry.
Very well said, except, that your presumptions are most probably based on watching Discovery Channel and History Channel dramatisation and propaganda.

Please allow me to disappoint you with certain facts that rubbishes many things that you have stated:
  • Despite having suffered more than any other country after the World War, USSR emerged as a superpower. It happened through hard work and dedication. The result is the launch of the Sputnik. Then Laika, Gagarin and Tereshkova followed. These facts, contrary to what you stated, does show that indeed the US lagged behind the USSR in many aspects. However, to appreciate this, you will need to get a fair understanding of supporting life in space. I don't even want to go into space-walk.
  • The first helmet mounted sighting was developed by the USSR. The West wasted little time in copying that.
  • The first SST (super sonic transport) was built by USSR. It was called Tupolev-144. Again, the West wasted little time accusing USSR of having stolen plans from the French, although, aviation experts and people who understand the difficulties of building such a plane will surely trash any such suggestion.
  • Despite being a 1960's Soviet design, the Soyuz Space Capsule remains the safest and most reliable space transport vehicle till date.

Thus to make something comparable to western products, the russian scientists/engineers often have no choice but to cut corners often at costs of reliability, life span, etc. And the specs of the final product are often bloated way beyond reasonable. I remember after an Iraqi Mig21 defected to Israel in 1966, at which time Mig21 was a state-of-the-art aircraft and a mystery to the west, western engineers took it apart and to their surprise they found the power plant (R-11) of the Mig21, to be a very crude engine made up of only 2000 components. It's contemporary equivalent in the west, the J79 on the other hadn, had 20000 components. They concluded that R-11 could be made by pre-WWII technologies.
So this conclusion is based on the assumption that the number of parts in a machine is directly proportional to it's finesse, i.e. more the merrier, isn't it? What about the possibility that the Soviets were just better designers and optimised their products making it simple, easy to maintain and reliable? Ever wonder why Google Chrome is gaining popularity over Internet Explorer?

You probably don't know, but one of the safest airliners the world has ever seen is the Ilyushin-62. Most Soviet airliners were made rugged and capable of withstanding a lot of abuse. The only problem with Ilyushin-62 was it's fuel economy, which I concede. Also, a MiG-29 can land in Football Field (not American Football, but Football), as can the Tupolev-134, Tupolev-154, Ilyushin-62 and Ilyushin-76 and the list does not end there. The most successful water bomber is Beriev-200 and it is not known how long it will take the US to built something as capable as this one. You should also check out Antonov-225 and Tupolev-160.

That's the reality of russian engineering. I have seen components such as hydraulic systems on russia's prized Su27, they just don't even come close to western standards. I think that's one reason China was able to reverse-engineer Su27 in so short frame of time.
I'm sure Soviet hydraulic systems allow Soviet planes to do a lot more which if Western planes tried, would explode into a big ball of aviation fuel fire!

Check this out:

And this one as well:

I for one think neither Russia nor China are really in the hunt for a true 5th generation fighter. F22 costed whorpping 70 billion dollars to develop, F35 is likely to exceed that. Russia currently does not have this kind of money. China on the other hand has the money, but not the expwerience. And neither have the cutting edge technologies or advanced manufacturing processes to make a fighter with true stealthness, the single most important criterion of a 5th generation fighter. PAK-FA will be an improved Su27/30/35, and J-XX will be an improved (twin-engined) J10, and neither will come near the capabilities of F22.
Now I have a piece of humour for you that an IIT graduate had once told me (this is just a joke, but reflects a lot of reality):
The Soviets and US were planning to go to space to do some research. Their efforts were kept secret from each other. The US wondered, "How on earth are the Soviets going to take notes in space? A ball point pen won't work if there is no gravity!" Thus, the US government send some spies to the USSR and spent a lot of money inventing a pen that can work without gravity.

However, the Soviets had already gone to space and returned, and soon the spies. The spies were asked, "How did they manage to invent a pen that works without gravity?" The spies responded, "Sir, they were using pencils!"
 
Last edited by a moderator:

death.by.chocolate

Professional
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
300
Likes
98
Country flag
Very well said, except, that your presumptions are most probably based on watching Discovery Channel and History Channel dramatisation and propaganda.

Please allow me to disappoint you with certain facts that rubbishes many things that you have stated:
  • Despite having suffered more than any other country after the World War, USSR emerged as a superpower. It happened through hard work and dedication. The result is the launch of the Sputnik. Then Laika, Gagarin and Tereshkova followed. These facts, contrary to what you states, does show that indeed the US lagged behind the USSR in many aspects. However, to appreciate this, you will need to get a fair understanding of supporting life in space. I don't even want to go into space-walk.
  • The first helmet mounted sighting was developed by the USSR. The West wasted little time in copying that.
  • The first SST (super sonic transport) was built by USSR. It was called Tupolev-144. Again, the West wasted little time accusing USSR of having stolen plans from the French, although, aviation experts and people who understand the difficulties of building such a plane will surely trash any such suggestion.
  • Despite being a 1960's Soviet design, the Soyuz Space Capsule remains the safest and most reliable space transport vehicle till date.


So this conclusion is based on the assumption that the number of parts in a machine is directly proportional to it's finesse, i.e. more the merrier, isn't it? What about the possibility that the Soviets were just better designers and optimised their products making it simple, easy to maintain and reliable? Ever wonder why Google Chrome is gaining popularity over Internet Explorer?

You probably don't know, but one of the safest airliners the world has ever seen is the Ilyushin-62. Most Soviet airliners were made rugged and capable of withstanding a lot of abuse. The only problem with Ilyushin-62 was it's fuel economy, which I concede. Also, a MiG-29 can land in Football Field (not American Football, but Football), as can the Tupolev-134, Tupolev-154, Ilyushin-62 and Ilyushin-76 and the list does not end there. The most successful water bomber is Beriev-200 and it is not known how long it will take the US to built something as capable as this one. You should also check out Antonov-225 and Tupolev-160.



I'm sure Soviet hydraulic systems allow Soviet planes to do a lot more which if Western planes tried, would explode into a big ball of aviation fuel fire!

Check this out:

And this one as well:



Now I have a piece of humour for you that an IIT graduate had once told me (this is just a joke, but reflects a lot of reality):
The Soviets and US were planning to go to space to do some research. Their efforts were kept secret from each other. The US wondered, "How on earth are the Soviets going to take notes in space? A ball point pen won't work if there is no gravity!" Thus, the US government send some spies to the USSR and spent a lot of money inventing a pen that can work without gravity.

However, the Soviets had already gone to space and returned, and soon the spies. The spies were asked, "How did they manage to invent a pen that works without gravity?" The spies responded, "Sir, they were using pencils!"
Helmet mounted sight were first fielded by the South Africans on the SAAF Mirage F1AZ. The Tupolev-144 was a failure, the program was officially abandoned in 1983 after a limited production of 16 aircraft's, two of which crashed, the first in Paris in 1973 and the second in 1978. The rest of your argument is too vague to be countered, and I'm not sure what landing a commercial jet in a grass field proves?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
Helmet mounted sight were first fielded by the South Africans on the SAAF Mirage F1AZ.
The F1AZ was a rudimentary system and only provided a proof of concept after downing a Soviet built aircraft in Angola.

Quote from Wiki:
The first aircraft with simple HMD devices appeared for experimental purpose in the mid seventies to aid in targeting heat seeking missiles. These rudimentary devices were better described as Helmet Mounted Sights. Mirage F1AZ of the SAAF [South African Airforce] used a locally developed helmet mounted sight.
The context is whether the USSR lagged behind in virtually every field. The USSR fielded the first successful HMD, that is not rudimentary. The first non-Soviet HMD was from Israel.

Quote from wiki:
The first successful non-Soviet HMD was the Israeli Air Force Elbit DASH series, fielded in conjunction with the Python 4, in the early 1990s. American and European fighter HMDs lagged behind, not becoming widely used until the late 1990s and early 2000s. The US-UK-Germany responded initially with a combined ASRAAM effort. Technical difficulties led to the US abandoning ASRAAM, instead funding development of the AIM-9X and the Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System in 1990.
The Tupolev-144 was a failure, the program was officially abandoned in 1983 after a limited production of 16 aircraft's, two of which crashed, the first in Paris in 1973 and the second in 1978.
Could you please elaborate why you think Tu-144 was a failure? AFAIK Tu-144 was abandoned due to financial reasons. The last Tu-144 that was being built was stopped halfway in 1984 and not 1983, and it was due to lack of funds.

After withdrawal of passenger flights, Tu-144 was used for testing purposes well into as late as 1997. Again, this project, although technically a success, was called off in 1999 due to lack of funds.

Moreover, what does 2 crashes prove?

Even Concorde is out of service. 20 Concordes were built and 14 entered airline service compared to 16 Tu-144 that were airworthy not including testbeds. Again, what does that prove?

In any case, Tu-144 still stands as the world's first SST. I'm not asking you to agree with this. This is just a fact.

The rest of your argument is too vague to be countered, and I'm not sure what landing a commercial jet in a grass field proves?
The rest of my arguments are not vague, they just simply cannot be countered. Commerical airliners landing in grass fields was an operational requirement of Soviet Airliners because of the semi-developed and gravel airfields in the vast Soviet countryside, especially in the far east.

I would recommend you visit the thread below and get a better understanding of the achievements of Soviet Aviation. They will also remove all the perceived "vagueness" that you might have.

Link: http://www.defenceforum.in/forum/showthread.php?t=252&highlight=Russian+Aviation
 
Last edited:

mattster

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
1,171
Likes
870
Country flag
Gentleman......if I can make a comment on behalf of Tony and myself - Nobody here is arguing that the Russians are not smart capable scientists here.

They still have some strong development capabilities in Aircraft/missiles etc., even if they are behind the US.

The point is that their industrial/technological/R&D/manufacturing base has been whittled down to the stage where they are far behind US, Europe and Japan maybe even Korea. They invested so much into the military industrial complex but neglected their commercial technologies.

They dont have access to state-of-the-art electronics, materials technology, R&D investment levels, and in manufacturing technology - they are even further behind.

You cannot maintain a top-notch defense industry without these pieces. That's why the Soviets and their equipment is falling behind.
That does not mean that they cannot excel in certain select areas.

Bottom line for India is simple - they can no longer rely on a uncompetitive Russia for most of their defense needs. They have to pick and choose.
They will buy Soviet equipment if no one else is willing to sell them the technology.
 

dineshchaturvedi

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
537
Likes
112
Country flag
Why can't we hire some of Russian engineers like China did to get benefited from their technology.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
Gentleman......if I can make a comment on behalf of Tony and myself - Nobody here is arguing that the Russians are not smart capable scientists here.

They still have some strong development capabilities in Aircraft/missiles etc., even if they are behind the US.

The point is that their industrial/technological/R&D/manufacturing base has been whittled down to the stage where they are far behind US, Europe and Japan maybe even Korea. They invested so much into the military industrial complex but neglected their commercial technologies.

They dont have access to state-of-the-art electronics, materials technology, R&D investment levels, and in manufacturing technology - they are even further behind.

You cannot maintain a top-notch defense industry without these pieces. That's why the Soviets and their equipment is falling behind.
That does not mean that they cannot excel in certain select areas.

Bottom line for India is simple - they can no longer rely on a uncompetitive Russia for most of their defense needs. They have to pick and choose.
They will buy Soviet equipment if no one else is willing to sell them the technology.
I was countering post #83 in general and the following comment in particular.

Whats people don't know is that Russia or its predecessor Soviet Union, has been way behind the west in virtually every kind of industry.
 

badguy2000

Respected Member
Senior Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
5,133
Likes
746
Why can't we hire some of Russian engineers like China did to get benefited from their technology.
a few Russian engineers can bring some blueprints and new ideas, but can not fix up your industry chains.
 

FGFAPilot1

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2010
Messages
306
Likes
845
Country flag
a few Russian engineers can bring some blueprints and new ideas, but can not fix up your industry chains.
we don't any Russian scientist do develope weapon systems for India we can do that by ourselves
for eg. LCA MKII will be better than anything your industry chain can produce or develope and I mean your own development not cheap rip offs of Russian AC
 

Tshering22

Sikkimese Saber
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
7,869
Likes
23,213
Country flag
a few Russian engineers can bring some blueprints and new ideas, but can not fix up your industry chains.
Our industry chains are fine enough and just need to be overhauled with latest infrastructure that is all. If you notice, we are more of a domestic-focused market in terms of whether it is civil stuff or military systems and usually don't engage in military exports on large scale. Call it different approaches or our weakness, it is your choice. We take time but prefer to gain knowledge out of our projects all while keeping reasonable defence up with foreign aircraft.

Actually, there is very slight difference between you making J-11s and us making SU-30MKIs. For example, Chinese as well as Indian engineers know everything about the SU-30 design by now and therefore have gained perfection in assembling them. But we continue assembling under the contract rather than terminate it and name the rest of production as ours. In war time, we can increase the same assembly rate and Russia (who is only pleased to get more money) won't mind at all.

Terminating contracts half way though leaves a bad taste in the mouths of suppliers who would next time either not sell you or would sell with conditions. Best example you said above; you want the 117 engine from Russia; but they know your interest in it and expect you to either buy SU-35 as a whole and that too a minimum fixed quantity, or have none of it.
 

Necrosis Factor

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
86
Likes
8
AHEM....$10 Billion contract awarded to a Chinese company by India? Domestic civil infrastructure what?
 

Necrosis Factor

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
86
Likes
8
Furthermore, a 300 crore contract to Huawei for the 3G network?

"India's Tata Teleservices Limited (TTSL) has signed a contract with Huawei to rollout TTSL's 3G network in India earler this week. Another Chinese vendor ZTE has landed in a 300-crore contract on Friday to supply WiMax systems to state-owned Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd (BSNL) for its broadband rollout."
http://lteworld.org/blog/huawei-zte-win-indian-contracts-following-security-concerns
 

Tshering22

Sikkimese Saber
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
7,869
Likes
23,213
Country flag
Furthermore, a 300 crore contract to Huawei for the 3G network?

"India's Tata Teleservices Limited (TTSL) has signed a contract with Huawei to rollout TTSL's 3G network in India earler this week. Another Chinese vendor ZTE has landed in a 300-crore contract on Friday to supply WiMax systems to state-owned Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd (BSNL) for its broadband rollout."
http://lteworld.org/blog/huawei-zte-win-indian-contracts-following-security-concerns
Dude, you don't make everything in house for the heck of making it. There's something called international trade where one can simply buy stuff rather than starting from scratch and making it needlessly. Your prized capability is to be the factory for this world to manufacture goods at mass production. Our capabilities are different and so is our focus. What's the big deal? Are your industrial experts possessing capabilities that Israelis or Japanese have in Nanotechnology? I don't think so.

But it is not a weakness; it is something that can be simply brought from others inside the country and used to build up based on it.
 

Tshering22

Sikkimese Saber
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
7,869
Likes
23,213
Country flag
AHEM....$10 Billion contract awarded to a Chinese company by India? Domestic civil infrastructure what?
And what has this got to do with making fighter jets in-house from design concept to actual production? Certainly not in case of J-11.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top