Heat treatment and phase transformations are immeasurably tough to detect and quantify, let alone reverse engineer.Karan M wrote:Irbis is as much software as hardware. 117S has breakthroughs in metallurgy. Doubt both will lend themselves to easy reverse engineering.
I second that - painful personal experiencemahadevbhu wrote:Heat treatment and phase transformations are immeasurably tough to detect and quantify, let alone reverse engineer.Karan M wrote:Irbis is as much software as hardware. 117S has breakthroughs in metallurgy. Doubt both will lend themselves to easy reverse engineering.
Metallurgy is an art - you learn from being with the master - not by looking at his products.
brar_w wrote:Some Aviation week pics from the recently concluded air show..
JY-27A AESA, operating in the VHF domain. Bill Sweetman estimates it to be 80 feet tall and around 40 feet wide. If deployed (what china claims) it would be the first VHF AESA radar in operation anywhere in the world according to AvWeek.
YL-8C UHF radar
JY-26 AESA, operating in the UHF range
Hmmm...it looks different.kit wrote: Guess it is copied from the S 300 system[/b] !!
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Nebo-SVU-Analysis.html
The 1L119 Nebo SVU is the first Russian VHF Band Active Electronically Steered Array antenna equipped radar to be disclosed publicly. While a limited amount of technical literature has been disclosed on this design, the VHF antenna array permits considerable additional analysis. Published performance data indicate that this radar has sufficient accuracy to be used as a battery target acquisition radar for the S-300PMU-1/2 / SA-20 Gargoyle and S-400 / SA-21 Growler Surface to Air Missile systems. Numerous Russian sources are citing exceptionally good performance against VLO/LO aircraft targets.
Karan M wrote:Are all of these 3D systems? Any links on them.
Haven't gone into the details of picture analysis, but if china copied it they would have had to do it through espionage because they never received any of these systems with their S300's. I don't think doing (without copying) this given their budgets is impossible given how much the electronics industry has changed and proliferated over the last 15 years. VHF radars have existed for a long time, it would only make sense that given that AESA radars are now pretty much the standard all over the world (India, US, Russia, Europe, China, Japan, South Korea, Poland etc) China would develop one covering the VHF and UHF domains. Missile development is not the big thing here in IADs (its more incremental addition of capability), its radar and especially the networking and apparently a lot of emphasis was placed on that aspect as well at the air show.MANNY K wrote:Hmmm...it looks different.kit wrote: Guess it is copied from the S 300 system[/b] !!
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Nebo-SVU-Analysis.html
The 1L119 Nebo SVU is the first Russian VHF Band Active Electronically Steered Array antenna equipped radar to be disclosed publicly. While a limited amount of technical literature has been disclosed on this design, the VHF antenna array permits considerable additional analysis. Published performance data indicate that this radar has sufficient accuracy to be used as a battery target acquisition radar for the S-300PMU-1/2 / SA-20 Gargoyle and S-400 / SA-21 Growler Surface to Air Missile systems. Numerous Russian sources are citing exceptionally good performance against VLO/LO aircraft targets.
Seriously if they want it they don't have to resort to espionage. Russia wont hesitate to supply China with tech given their close diplomatic and economic relationship as long as the price is right.brar_w wrote:
Haven't gone into the details of picture analysis, but if china copied it they would have had to do it through espionage because they never received any of these systems with their S300's. I don't think doing (without copying) this given their budgets is impossible given how much the electronics industry has changed and proliferated over the last 15 years. VHF radars have existed for a long time, it would only make sense that given that AESA radars are now pretty much the standard all over the world (India, US, Russia, Europe, China, Japan, South Korea, Poland etc) China would develop one covering the VHF and UHF domains. Missile development is not the big thing here in IADs (its more incremental addition of capability), its radar and especially the networking and apparently a lot of emphasis was placed on that aspect as well at the air show.
TAIPEI — China’s new CX-1 supersonic anti-ship cruise missile is ready for export to America’s friends and foes alike, with potential markets including Iran, Pakistan and African and South American countries.
On display at the recent Airshow China in Zhuhai, the missile resembles India’s BrahMos cruise missile with a large intake in the nose, referred to as the “axial symmetrical inlet” in the brochure. However, that appears to be the only similarity, according to Chinese-language media outlets, which mention differences in wing, guidance vanes and jet vanes of the two missiles.
Russia’s NPO Mashinostroyenia (NPOM) and India’s Defence Research and Development Organisation jointly developed the BrahMos, basing it on the NPOM’s Yakhont (P-800 Oniks) missile.
Vasiliy Kashin, a researcher at Moscow’s Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, disputed Chinese media reports that denied a connection. He said the CX-1 is likely based in part on the BrahMos surface-to-surface missile, “but Russia did not sell this to China or offer enough data to China to build one.” However, Russia has sold the missile to other states in the region, including Indonesia and Vietnam, “so it is conceivable one or more of those states could have provided some details to China,” he said.
Andrew Erickson, a China military specialist at the US Naval War College and coauthor of the book “A Low-Visibility Force Multiplier: Assessing China’s Cruise Missile Ambitions,” said that while the CX-1’s “precise provenance remains uncertain, the overall capabilities of China’s cruise missile industry are clearly significant.”
China continues to pursue foreign technological sources actively, “but is able to combine multiple technologies and vectors of inspiration with genuine indigenous capabilities to produce major new systems of its own,” he said.
Kashin said the CX-1 is a product of the Chinese Academy of Launch Technology (CALT), or the 1st Academy under the China Aerospace Science and Technology Corp. Most of China’s cruise missiles, including the most advanced ones, are developed by China Aerospace Science and Industry Corp.’s 3rd Academy.
Kashin said though it is unusual for CALT to be “in this game, they do have very strong aerodynamics experts and other capabilities that they can parlay into competing in the ballistic missile and cruise missile sectors.”
The CX-1 display at Zhuhai indicates the missile comes in two variants; the CX-1A ship-borne system and CX-1B road-mobile land-based system. With a range of 40 to 280 kilometers, the missile can carry a 260-kilogram warhead. These numbers are below Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) restrictions that ban missiles carrying payloads greater than 500 kilograms at ranges exceeding 300 kilometers.
However, Kashin suggested these numbers could be designed to mislead and that the actual capabilities of the missile might be greater than MTCR restrictions.
At speeds of Mach 3, the missile can strike a target within a circular error probability of 20 meters, according to the display. Warheads include a unitary semi-armor-piercing warhead for ships and a unitary fragmentation-blast warhead and unitary penetration warhead for land attack.
Each road-mobile launcher carries two missiles. When attacking a slow target, such as a ship, the missile can make a terminal horizontal attack by combining high and low cruise and employ the compound guidance of a strap-down inertial measurement unit and active radar seeker.
A land-based road-mobile unit would consist of one command vehicle, one integrated support vehicle, three launching vehicles, three transporter-loader vehicle and 12 canisters for two-wave attacks.
Did we or the russians sell Brahmos to either Indonesia or Vietnam? Secret deal perhaps? or just a case of bad reporting?brar_w wrote:China's CX-1 Missile Now Exportable
Vasiliy Kashin, a researcher at Moscow’s Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, disputed Chinese media reports that denied a connection. He said the CX-1 is likely based in part on the BrahMos surface-to-surface missile, “but Russia did not sell this to China or offer enough data to China to build one.” However, Russia has sold the missile to other states in the region, including Indonesia and Vietnam, “so it is conceivable one or more of those states could have provided some details to China,” he said.
The Russians did.xave wrote:Did we or the russians sell Brahmos to either Indonesia or Vietnam? Secret deal perhaps? or just a case of bad reporting?
it is reported that in 2~3 years, the first batch J20a( which can not manage supersonic cruise) is to enter into service.brar_w wrote:Its definitely not easy to change engines but I guess they would have been designing specific engines or designing the aircraft around 1 or two engines. Having a poor Thrust to weight ratio would obviously negatively impact performance, and drag would still be substantial compared to a clean 4th generation aircraft such as a flanker. of course with weapons the J-20 would hold an advantage. I suspect their tactics would largely be to use this as a long range penetrating bomber for both land attack and maritime attack with other fighters around to protect it. It can also use its RCS and avionics to its advantage to feed other legacy aircrafts.
Having just frozen the design really does not mean that the aircraft is imminent. It will still take them some years (perhaps unto 5-6) to get even the most basic version out to an operational squadron and that would be if they begin serial production concurrent to developmental testing. There is only a limited amount of testing one can do prior to completion of the design (that is what is known as CDR in the western world) so I expect them to begin a lengthy test program if indeed the design has been locked in.
China’s military planners maybe considering construction of at least three aircraft carriers — central to the assertion of “sea control” in regional waters — as part of their response to the “Asia Pivot” of the United States.
China’s Communist Party affiliated daily “Global Times” has run an article that cites “military experts” who “confirm that a country needs at least three carriers to form a basic battle force”. That would always ensure the availability of at least one of the three carriers for operations.
But the article, which first appeared in China Newsweek magazine, also quotes Russian media reports that China plans to introduce four platforms, including the Liaoning — the aircraft carrier, used for training, which was purchased from Ukraine and commissioned by China in 2012.
Analysts say the heated debate in Chinese military circles over the size and capability of the Navy has been energised by the “Asia Pivot” or the “rebalancing” strategy of the Obama administration. The U.S. is firm on roping in its allies — especially Japan, South Korea, Australia and the Philippines — to strengthen forces around China’s periphery.
The Global Times pointed out that out of two or more ships, China will first build a Type 001A carrier. Quoting the Canadian publication Kanwa Defence Review, the article claims construction of the first ship began at the end of 2013 by the China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation, based in Dalian. The second indigenous carrier would be built at the Jiangnan Shipyard in Shanghai.
The first two platforms are likely to be of standard size with a displacement between 30,000-40,000 tons, making them equivalent to the INS Vikramaditya of the Indian navy.
:
:
:
:
No, they most likely meant the the Yakhont..xave wrote:Did we or the russians sell Brahmos to either Indonesia or Vietnam? Secret deal perhaps? or just a case of bad reporting?brar_w wrote:China's CX-1 Missile Now Exportable
Vasiliy Kashin, a researcher at Moscow’s Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, disputed Chinese media reports that denied a connection. He said the CX-1 is likely based in part on the BrahMos surface-to-surface missile, “but Russia did not sell this to China or offer enough data to China to build one.” However, Russia has sold the missile to other states in the region, including Indonesia and Vietnam, “so it is conceivable one or more of those states could have provided some details to China,” he said.
United Arab Emirates ordered 150 VP11 4x4 MRAP vehicles to Chinese Defense Company NORINCO.
According to Xiao Ning, executive chief editor of Beijing-based Weapon Magazine, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) ordered a total of 150 VP11, a new Chinese-made 4x4 MRAP (Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected) vehicle designed and developed by the Chinese Defense Company NORINCO.
China conducted the third flight test of a new hypersonic missile this week as part of its strategic nuclear program and efforts to develop delivery vehicles capable of defeating US countermeasures, defense officials said.
The flight test of the developmental Wu-14 hypersonic glide vehicle was monitored by US intelligence agencies Tuesday during a flight test in western China.
The latest flight test followed earlier tests of the Wu-14 on Jan. 9 and Aug. 7. The three tests indicate that China’s development of a strike vehicle capable of traveling up to eight times the speed of sound is a high-priority element in China’s large-scale military buildup.
A Pentagon spokesman confirmed the test but declined to provide details.
“We are aware of reports regarding this test and we routinely monitor foreign defense activities,” Marine Corps Lt. Col. Jeff Pool told the Washington Free Beacon.
“However, we don’t comment on our intelligence or assessments of foreign weapon systems,” Pool added, noting that the Pentagon has encouraged China to adopt greater openness with regard to its defense investments and military objectives “to avoid miscalculation.”
Last month in Beijing, the United States and China agreed to a new military accord that called for notifying each country of major military activities. It could not be learned if the Chinese notified the Pentagon in advance of the Wu-14 test.
The Wu-14 was launched atop a Chinese ballistic missile and released along the edge of space.
Past tests of the glide vehicle were clocked as reaching an estimated speed of Mach 10, or 10 times the speed of sound — around 7,680 miles per hour.
Such speeds create difficult aeronautics and physics challenges for guidance systems and place extreme stress on materials used in construction of the vehicle.
The annual report of the congressional US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, made public Nov. 20, reveals China’s hypersonic weapons program is a major development effort.
The report said the People’s Liberation Army “is developing hypersonic glide vehicles as a core component of its next-generation precision strike capability.”
“Hypersonic glide vehicles could render existing US missile defense systems less effective and potentially obsolete,” the report said.
The report said once deployed the Wu-14 “could enable China to conduct kinetic strikes anywhere in the world within minutes to hours.”
China plans to deploy its high-speed glide vehicle by 2020 and a scramjet powered hypersonic vehicle by 2025.
Lee Fuell, technical director for force modernization and employment at the National Air and Space Intelligence Center (NASIC), told the Commission that Chinese glide vehicle is launched on a ballistic missile, dives to hypersonic speed and glides to its target. The weapon currently is assessed to be “associated with [China’s] nuclear deterrent forces.”
“Of great concern would be if [China] was to apply the same technology and capability with a conventional warhead or even just without a warhead because of the kinetic energy that it has in combination with their theater ballistic missiles … in a theater role,” Fuell said.
The intelligence analyst said that hypersonic vehicles “are extremely difficult to defend against because just the time is so compressed between initial detection, being able to get a track, being able to get a fire control solution, and then just being able to have a weapon that can intercept them in some way just because of the speed at which they’re moving.”
“If that is combined with more traditional ballistic missile attacks forcing a target to defend against very high aspect warheads coming in this way at the same time they have to defend against low altitude, very high speed targets coming in [another] way, it makes the defense problem orders of magnitude worse for the defender,” he said.
The commission report stated that China is expanding its strategic nuclear forces “significantly,” with deployment of new missiles, submarines, and multiple-warhead weapons.
Rick Fisher, a China military affairs analyst, said more tests are needed for China to turn the Wu-14 into a working weapon.
“But the real story is that such a program is now well underway,” said Fisher, with the International Assessment and Strategy Center. “For hypersonic systems, all tests, failures, and successes, provide a positive contribution toward the goal of developing a weapon.”
The Wu-14 is part of what military analysts have said in a growing hypersonic arms race involving China, Russia, and the United States.
Russia’s government announced last month that Moscow plans to field hypersonic missiles by 2020.
By contrast, US development of a hypersonic weapons program has been limited.
The Aug. 25 test of the Army’s Advanced Hypersonic Weapon ended in disaster after the booster launching the weapon blew up shortly after launch from a test base on Kodiak Island, Alaska.
Funding for hypersonic weapons development also has been limited to around $360 million dollars, an amount critics say is small compared to estimated investments by China.
“It is now necessary for the United States to substantially increase funding in two areas,” Fisher, the China military analyst said. “First the U.S. must expand and accelerate its own hypersonic weapons program.”
The Pentagon should fund several types of hypersonic systems in a development competition, Fisher said, as well as further research in counter-hypersonic arms.
Past Pentagon research has included development of both guided-but-unpowered glide vehicles, and high-technology scramjet-powered hypersonic vehicles.
A space plane called the X-37 also is being developed as part of a program known as conventional Prompt Global Strike.
US intelligence analysts have said the current Chinese Wu-14 program is currently part of its strategic nuclear program. However, China also could use the Wu-14 as part of its conventional strike program, such as planning attacks on aircraft carriers in the western Pacific.
“While missile based counter-systems may provide an early solution, there is much more potential in the realm of energy weapons,” Fisher said.
“For example, rail guns offer great potential for early solutions to maneuvering hypersonic weapons and this technology deserves much greater funding,” he said.
Fisher also said the United States should increase capabilities for targeting China’s space and high altitude reconnaissance and surveillance systems, to include satellites.
“These will be absolutely necessary for China to successfully employ its long range hypersonic weapons,” he said.
A Chinese Embassy spokesman could not be reached for comment.
Lora Saalman, an expert on China’s hypersonic development at the Carnegie Endowment, said after China’s second Wu-14 test in August that the closeness of the first two tests showed that Beijing is “fast-tracking” the strategic program.
“When compared with the yearly gaps in between its [anti-satellite] and [ballistic missile defense] tests in 2007, 2010, 2013, and 2014, the Wu-14 accelerates China’s development timeline exponentially,” she said in an email in August.
Saalman believes the Wu-14 is part of a Chinese version of the U.S. conventional Prompt Global Strike program.
TAIPEI — Taiwan’s F-16s face a growing threat from China’s arsenal of surface-to-air missiles (SAMs). The latest and gravest is the Russian sale of 400-kilometer-range S-400 Triumf road-mobile SAM systems to China.
The Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation has downplayed recent Russian-language media reports of an agreement and contract, but “as I understand it, it is basically true,” said Vasiliy Kashin, a China military specialist at Moscow’s Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies.
Russian media reports indicate China and Russia have signed a US $3 billion contract to procure an initial six S-400 battalions. The missile is an upgraded variant of the S-300, now fielded by China in battalions based near major cities and scattered along the coast facing Taiwan and Japan.
Kashin, who attended the recent Airshow China in Zhuhai, said that with a range of 400 kilometers and fielded in Fujian Province, the SAM system will be able to cover the whole of Taiwan airspace, thus finally solving the “problem of air superiority for the Chinese.”
If China chooses to deploy the S-400 in Shandong Province, it will provide coverage of airspace over the Senkaku Islands. “That will be another asymmetric capability, together with anti-ship ballistic missiles, which will boost Chinese potential in dealing with the local conflicts in East Asia,” Kashin said.
China has staked a claim to the Japanese-controlled Senkaku Islands, which it refers to as the Diaoyu Islands. Other factors suggesting China will deploy the S-400 over the East China Sea include the fact that China declared an air defense identification zone over the East China Sea, including the Senkakus, in November 2013.
“Given its extremely long range and effective electronic warfare capabilities, the S-400 is a game-changing system that challenges current military capabilities at the operational level of war,” said Paul Giarra, president, Global Strategies and Transformation. The S-400 will have the “effect of turning a defensive system into an offensive system, and extend China’s A2/AD [anti-access/area-denial] umbrella over the territory of American allies and the high seas.”
The S-400 will give China more confidence in controlling airspace over Taiwan, and will serve as a critical factor in defeating Taiwan’s air defense capabilities during a war, said York Chen, a former senior adviser of Taiwan’s National Security Council.
After China’s surface-to-surface missiles destroy Taiwan’s air bases and runways at the beginning of a conflict, the S-400 could target remaining fighter aircraft that managed to reach the air beforehand, not to mention any US or Japanese fighters coming to Taiwan’s aid during the battle. Chen supports procurement of short take-off, vertical-landing aircraft such as the F-35B fighter and V-22 Osprey, for cargo/troop transport. China has 1,300 short-range missiles aimed at Taiwan. Air bases would be wiped out shortly after a war begins with China.
This possible SAM sale to China highlights the growing importance of Taiwan’s indigenous self-defense programs, including its stealth UAV program; its HF-2E land-attack cruise missile program; and its air-launched Wan Chien (Ten Thousand Swords) joint standoff weapon, said Ian Easton, research fellow, The Project 2049 Institute.
“Taiwan also has a clear operational requirement for large numbers of cheap ballistic missiles. In that regard, the indigenous technological capability is certainly there, but Taiwan has kept its programs remarkably well hidden,” he said.
Effective air defense systems like the S-400 are consequential because of the cost equation involved, Giarra said. Surface-to-air missile systems are much less expensive than the manned and unmanned aircraft they are designed to shoot down, and the very long range of the S-400 multiplies the advantage.
“Without effective countermeasures, aircraft will be held away from China’s coasts, giving teeth, for instance, to China’s assertion that surveillance missions in China’s EEZ [exclusive economic zone] are not allowed,” he said.
China has been adamant that US military aircraft cease flying within China’s EEZ and has harassed US military flights and sea-going vessels since 2001. In August, a Chinese J-11 fighter harassed a US Navy P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft near Hainan Island.
Despite the threat an advanced SAM system to the region, there is confidence that Taiwan, Japan and the US will have options to defeat it, Easton said. These include electronic warfare and locating the radar and destroying it with anti-radiation missiles.
“As soon as its long-range radar was turned on it would be subject to immediate interception by Taiwanese signals intelligence [SIGINT] units on Tung-yin Island and Matsu Island,” he said. “It would also be vulnerable to American and Japanese SIGINT units on Okinawa and the surrounding islands, to say nothing of allied SIGINT-gathering submarines parked off the Chinese coast — and both manned and unmanned SIGINT aircraft patrolling the East China Sea.”
A Taiwan Ministry of Defense official said that though the S-400 is road-mobile, expectations are China would deploy them at fixed sites as it did with earlier S-300PMU SAM systems. “This habit will make them vulnerable to attack and no SAM system is perfect, especially Russian,” he said.
Taiwan has its own missile systems to counter China, such as the Tien Kung 2 and 3 SAM systems and the Hsiung Feng 2E land-attack cruise missile. Taiwan is working on an extended-range Hsiung Feng 2 anti-ship missile system with a 250-kilometer range, which is in the launch testing phase, he said.
Lin Chong-Pin, former deputy minister of national defense who also served as the first vice chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council, said the S-400 is “another increment of a growing package of ‘game changers,’ which began emerging a decade ago.”
Taiwan’s military advantages over China began eroding in the early 1990s. As a consequence, China’s strategy “evolved from a war of annihilation to a war of paralysis as the battle scenario on Taiwan.”
Now, Lin said, even a military operation on Taiwan based on a “war of paralysis ranks low among Beijing’s options, as Beijing has available so many other what I call ‘extra-military instruments’ — economic, media-related, diplomatic, psychological — to eventually ‘integrate’ Taiwan into China’s fold.”
BEIJING - China's foreign ministry rebuked the US Congress on Monday after legislators passed a bill allowing the sale of second-hand warships to Taiwan, the self-ruled island which Beijing claims as a renegade province.
The US Senate unanimously approved the bill last week, authorising the sale of four Perry-class guided missile frigates to Taiwan. China expressed anger in April when a similar bill passed in the US House of Representatives.
China and Taiwan have been ruled separately since defeated Nationalist forces fled to the island at the end of a civil war with the communists in 1949. China has never renounced the use of force to bring Taiwan under its control.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said the bill's passage was an "interference" in China's internal affairs.
"China is resolutely opposed to this and has already made solemn representations to the US side. We hope the US Congress stops carrying forward this legislation," Hong told reporters at a regular press briefing.
"We also hope the newly elected authorities can prevent the implementation of this legislation to avoid influencing the development of China-US relations," Hong said.
NDORE: A noted defence scientist today rejected suggestions that China's new missile Chaoxun-1 (CX-1) was a copy of Indian supersonic cruise missile BrahMos.
The technology used in CX-1 and BrahMos, an Indo-Russian joint production, was completely different, said A Sivathanu Pillai, who formerly served as Chief Controller of Research and Development at DRDO.
In outward appearance, CX-1 resembles BrahMos, but similarity ends there. Both missiles are different products in terms in terms of engine and other technological parameters. The Chinese missile has nothing to do with BrahMos, he maintained.
Pillai, a Padma Bhushan awardee and founder-CEO and Managing Director of BrahMos Aerospace Pvt Ltd, is also called "the father of BrahMos".
The distinguished scientist, who was here to take part in a function at IIM-Indore, was talking to reporters on sidelines of the event.
Pillai said it was wrong to speculate that Russia had leaked BrahMos' technology to China so that the latter could produce a similar missile.
The supersonic cruise missile underwent first successful flight test in 2001 and since then superior versions of the weapon system have been developed, he said.
Pillai said to realise Prime Minister Narendra Modi's ambitious 'Make in India' programme, there was a need to build a military-industry complex in the country in partnership between public and private companies.
Nothing that we didn't know of, but good to hear it from the Horse's mouth!China has denied its new stealth fighter J-31 could take down the US F-35 joint strike fighter, but admitted challenging the latter has always been its goal.
Lin Zuoming, the president of the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) which manufactured J-31, denied in interview with CCTV that J-31 "should be able to take (the opponent model) down when it takes to the sky."
"Both the J-31 and J-20 are products of China's move to develop stealth fighters. It is unrealistic for the two models to surpass their US counterparts in a short period of time," Wang Yanan, the deputy chief editor of Aerospace Knowledge magazine, told the daily.
Yeah no surprise here but I don't think anyone can match the US right now.Asit P wrote:China admits its stealth fighter not a match to US F-35
Nothing that we didn't know of, but good to hear it from the Horse's mouth!China has denied its new stealth fighter J-31 could take down the US F-35 joint strike fighter, but admitted challenging the latter has always been its goal.
Lin Zuoming, the president of the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) which manufactured J-31, denied in interview with CCTV that J-31 "should be able to take (the opponent model) down when it takes to the sky."
"Both the J-31 and J-20 are products of China's move to develop stealth fighters. It is unrealistic for the two models to surpass their US counterparts in a short period of time," Wang Yanan, the deputy chief editor of Aerospace Knowledge magazine, told the daily.
It is copy more or less of Yakhont, it also validates original Janes article of Asian nation funding Yakhont in late 90s everyone assumed that they meant India Brahmos but that deal didn't come up till later and was joint venture. Also it still didn't answer how Russians were able to still offer Yakhont for export, IMO that country was China which likely got some tech transfer as part of this deal similar to RIF/S-300/SA-N-11 etc. Only thing surprising is it took this long to deploy it.VinodTK wrote:China's CX-1 missile is not copy of BrahMos: Ex-DRDO scientist
NDORE: A noted defence scientist today rejected suggestions that China's new missile Chaoxun-1 (CX-1) was a copy of Indian supersonic cruise missile BrahMos.
The technology used in CX-1 and BrahMos, an Indo-Russian joint production, was completely different, said A Sivathanu Pillai, who formerly served as Chief Controller of Research and Development at DRDO.
In outward appearance, CX-1 resembles BrahMos, but similarity ends there. Both missiles are different products in terms in terms of engine and other technological parameters. The Chinese missile has nothing to do with BrahMos, he maintained.
Pillai, a Padma Bhushan awardee and founder-CEO and Managing Director of BrahMos Aerospace Pvt Ltd, is also called "the father of BrahMos".
The distinguished scientist, who was here to take part in a function at IIM-Indore, was talking to reporters on sidelines of the event.
Pillai said it was wrong to speculate that Russia had leaked BrahMos' technology to China so that the latter could produce a similar missile.
The supersonic cruise missile underwent first successful flight test in 2001 and since then superior versions of the weapon system have been developed, he said.
Pillai said to realise Prime Minister Narendra Modi's ambitious 'Make in India' programme, there was a need to build a military-industry complex in the country in partnership between public and private companies.
But pretty much everything points to it you have to connect the dots, there was an asian nation who funded Yakhont if you believe Janes report in late 90s. Russians have said Brahmos $$ wasn't use for former's development which materialized out of where and became available for export even before Brahmos. I doubt Russian navy funded it considering they have shown very little interest in procuring Onyks or Brahmos.Sid wrote:^^
John, form follows function. For every new aircraft revealed by Soviets Americans used to cry bucket load saying its a copy of their existing designs. But they used to look same as their design goals were same.
I seriously don't believe Russians shared this tech (at least knowingly).
