Deka Simulations announces the DCS: J-8II for DCS World!

[Harlikwin]

58 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:

 

 

Yes, you mean the first J-8 variants airframe, sure they do.

But I was refering specifically to the J-8II, and airframe wise there is nothing more similar to an Su-15 Flagon than a J-8II.

 

 

I mean, who knows, maybe they got the plans, but I doubt aerodynamically they are the same. 

[Harlikwin]

38 minutes ago, FlankerFan35 said:

Well, that wouldn't be very useful as nothing can carry the 77-1 currently except perhaps the 29S. As I always say, China is Red's future when it comes to modern, they develop faster at more advanced levels so it's more likely for us to get a J-10A/B for example than any Russia tech that isn't prehistoric.

Well, if the J8PP isn't a clue, we won't get a J-10/A/B or C... Nor anything that the PLAF operated.

Edited February 22, 2023 by Harlikwin

[Top Jockey]

6 minutes ago, LowRider88 said:

Not really.

Looking similar does not mean the designers set out to rebuild another aircraft.

Did the J-8 designers say to them selves “hey, I want the Su-15”?  No, they said “hey I need something that can intercept something faster and higher than what I can do now”. That’s called convergent evolution.

Did the Su-15 have a J-8I similar looking early version?

No, they just look superficially similar.

 

Oh they said that ? ... and I thought they instead noticed :

When replacing the Su-9 and Su-11 with the Su-15, the russians abandoned the nose air intake design and replaced it with a conventional radome and side air intakes.

... to create room for a modern (and bigger) fire-control radar, and also use more powerful engines.

 

Lo and behold, the new J-8II emerges, and its 'convergent evolution' airframe design looks like a print copy of the Su-15.

[FlankerFan35]

19 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

Well, if the J8PP isn't a clue, we won't get a J-10/A/B or C... Nor anything that the PLAF operated.

 

 J-10As are being massively upgraded and possibly being exported, a 10A/B may be a possibility, especially with the early block 10As having the same radar/sensors and similar cockpit to the JF-17 we have currently. 10B has IRST and production batches AESA so that might be harder. AL-31F engine documents ED has already so I think it's most possible compared to any other red gen 4.

A J-10A is literally a fast JF-17.

[LowRider88]

24 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:

 

Oh they said that ? ... and I thought they instead noticed :

When replacing the Su-9 and Su-11 with the Su-15, the russians abandoned the nose air intake design and replaced it with a conventional radome and side air intakes.

... to create room for a modern (and bigger) fire-control radar, and also use more powerful engines.

 

Lo and behold, the new J-8II emerges, and its 'convergent evolution' airframe design looks like a print copy of the Su-15.

So finally you reveal your true colors.  Just took a bit of prodding.

So your whole point is to try to low key imply the lame and highly uneducated Chinese copy and paste troll narrative.

How many people on this thread have to “try and help you out understand” that the J-8 was based on the MiG-21 and not the Su-15.

Give it some time, you will get there eventually.

What if it was a print copy?  So?  What is so significant about your superficial grasp of airframe design that it warrants bothering everyone with the dead topic?  Did you know the F-15 was an attempt to copy the MiG-25?
China didn’t get any help from the Su-15 design team.  That was the Soviet Chinese split at the time.

As for print copy, where is the bubble canopy the Su has?  Where is the Su’s ventral tail?

You can shake your fist all you want, I’ve lost interest in wasting my time on useless observations.

Before we part ways, here is a video from a gentleman who actually understands the influences for the J-8.  He’s playing an air quake,  it at least he gets it.

 

[jonny415]

@FlankerFan35 not sure if R-77-1 can be equipped with the mig-29 model is in DCS probably need mig-29SM, read on the forum some where where ED team said clearly they not even thinking of R77-1. Clearly something needs to be done hopefully some 3d parties step in like Iron Deka has otherwise it’s going to be just one sided game.

[F-2]

9 minutes ago, jonny415 said:

@FlankerFan35 not sure if R-77-1 can be equipped with the mig-29 model is in DCS probably need mig-29SM, read on the forum some where where ED team said clearly they not even thinking of R77-1. Clearly something needs to be done hopefully some 3d parties step in like Iron Deka has otherwise it’s going to be just one sided game.

There was a SU-27SM pilot a while ago who claimed any platform that could fire a R-77 could fire a R-77-1 without modification. So in theory both the Mig-29S and J-11 should be able too regardless if they ever have.

[Wyvern]

I even think that the Very Early PL-12s also had an R-77 Seeker that made them compatible.

What I would be interested in would the R-27A and the R-27EA, basically an Active R-27

 

[Top Jockey]

5 minutes ago, LowRider88 said:

So finally you reveal your true colors.  Just took a bit of prodding.

So your whole point is to try to low key imply the lame and highly uneducated Chinese copy and paste troll narrative.

How many people on this thread have to “try and help you out understand” that the J-8 was based on the MiG-21 and not the Su-15.

Give it some time, you will get there eventually.

What if it was a print copy?  So?  What is so significant about your superficial grasp of airframe design that it warrants bothering everyone with the dead topic?  Did you know the F-15 was an attempt to copy the MiG-25?
China didn’t get any help from the Su-15 design team.  That was the Soviet Chinese split at the time.

As for print copy, where is the bubble canopy the Su has?  Where is the Su’s ventral tail?

...

 

Trolling ? Rest assured I'm not the one frustrated over a mere difference of opinions.

 

- please stop trying to change people's attention to the 1st J-8 variant (with nose air intake);  

- you understood very well I'm talking about J-8II (or J-8B)... and this one's airframe couldn't be more identical to an Su-15.

 

"F-15 was an attempt to copy the MiG-25"  ...  what is this ? Joke of the year ?

The F-15 was an attempt to surpass it, and they succeded.

 

Sure, let's put a bubble canopy here and a ventral fin there and pretend it's a 100 % indigenous production design.

[Torbernite]

 

 

Oh they said that ? ... and I thought they instead noticed :

When replacing the Su-9 and Su-11 with the Su-15, the russians abandoned the nose air intake design and replaced it with a conventional radome and side air intakes.

... to create room for a modern (and bigger) fire-control radar, and also use more powerful engines.

 

Lo and behold, the new J-8II emerges, and its 'convergent evolution' airframe design looks like a print copy of the Su-15.

 

 

 

Trolling ? Rest assured I'm not the one frustrated over a mere difference of opinions.

 

- please stop trying to change people's attention to the 1st J-8 variant (with nose air intake);  

- you understood very well I'm talking about J-8II (or J-8B)... and this one's airframe couldn't be more identical to an Su-15.

 

"F-15 was an attempt to copy the MiG-25"  ...  what is this ? Joke of the year ?

The F-15 was an attempt to surpass it, and they succeded.

 

Sure, let's put a bubble canopy here and a ventral fin there and pretend it's a 100 % indigenous production design.

"Looks like" never provides reliable logics. Or I can just say, sounds like you are just despising their design capability and just going your own way.

Side air intakes were used in many aircrafts, even on Q-5 although it doesn't use a radar. They don't need specifically a Su-15 to know "side intakes provides better radar position", every designer should already know that in 1970s.

Su-15 doesn't use the intake variable ramps and leading-edge conical camber, which the J-8II rely on. That's because the rear part is inherited from original J-8 which is based on the MiG-21 with enlarging and tunes of aerodynamics, and the frontal part is partly learned from MiG-23 and F-4. During developing of J-8II, MiG-23 from Egypt and F-4 from Vietnam were studied. The air intakes provided important references, the engine of MiG-23 was also highly estimated and chosen to be the original power for J-10 prototype (while not successfully imitated before AL-31F acquired). If you are just to find a foreign dad for J-8II to prove the Chinese can't design a fighter without a copy source, then that should be the point instead of Su-15. Even "J-8II is a MiG-21+MiG-23" is better than your attempt. But sadly, you don't even get a better view to do that.

[Top Jockey]

2 minutes ago, Torbernite said:

 

"Looks like" never provides reliable logics. Or I can just say, sounds like you are just despising their design capability and just going your own way.

Side air intakes were used in many aircrafts, even on Q-5 although it doesn't use a radar. They don't need specifically a Su-15 to know "side intakes provides better radar position", every designer should already know that in 1970s.

Su-15 doesn't use the intake variable ramps and leading-edge conical camber, which the J-8II rely on. That's because the rear part is inherited from original J-8 which is based on the MiG-21 with enlarging and tunes of aerodynamics, and the frontal part is partly learned from MiG-23 and F-4. During developing of J-8II, MiG-23 from Egypt and F-4 from Vietnam were studied. The air intakes provided important references, the engine of MiG-23 was also highly estimated and chosen to be the original power for J-10 prototype (while not successfully imitated before AL-31F acquired). If you are just to find a foreign dad for J-8II to prove the Chinese can't design a fighter without a copy source, then that should be the point instead of Su-15. Even "J-8II is a MiG-21+MiG-23" is better than your attempt. But sadly, you don't even get a better view to do that.

 

No, sorry but calling things as one see's them is not "despising" anyone ; I assure you that's not me.

Now, don't ask me to "sweep the dust under the rug", when I feel some credits start to get discreetly exaggerated.

( Also didn't see you intervene at the: "F-15 was an attempt to copy the MiG-25" either... )

 

If you had read my comments from the previous page, you wouldn't be saying that ... if I well recal, I also wrote:

- for instance, JF-17 and J-20, being highly original / inovative airframe designs.

- Not being a surprise, that some variants airframes are indeed highly similar to russian aircraft, as some of these airframes were licenced production from Russia.

 

Yeah all those other jets were taken into account into the J-8II's development - sure, great ; but does that by itself invalidate the totally striking resemblances with the Su-15 ?

[LowRider88]

39 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:

 

Trolling ? Rest assured I'm not the one frustrated over a mere difference of opinions.

 

- please stop trying to change people's attention to the 1st J-8 variant (with nose air intake);  

- you understood very well I'm talking about J-8II (or J-8B)... and this one's airframe couldn't be more identical to an Su-15.

 

"F-15 was an attempt to copy the MiG-25"  ...  what is this ? Joke of the year ?

The F-15 was an attempt to surpass it, and they succeded.

 

Sure, let's put a bubble canopy here and a ventral fin there and pretend it's a 100 % indigenous production design.

Bahaha!  Dude loses it and admits he is trolling the lame narrative.  Terribly if I must say.

Maybe you should do some research before you speak:

If J-8 was an attempt to copy the Su-15, as you so preciously keep hoping, then how is it any different from the F-15 copying the MiG-25?  The Su-15 can’t maneuver under 200 kph, with its higher wingloading.  
Copy paste, copy past, blah blah blah.

Hey the side profile of the F-16 looks mightily similar to the Ye-8.

Ah ha!  Copy paste!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan-Gurevich_Ye-8#/media/File:Mikoyan-Gurevich_Ye-8_3-view_line_drawing.jpg
 

Bahaha!

Edited February 23, 2023 by LowRider88

[jonny415]

You guys must have a day off today lol

[Top Jockey]

2 minutes ago, LowRider88 said:

Bahaha!  Dude loses it and admits he is trolling the lame narrative.  Terribly if I must say.

Maybe you should do some research before you speak:

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjzgIuAv6r9AhUmkYkEHbOdCwYQtwJ6BAgKEAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DvqKE5xCogH0&usg=AOvVaw0zQ2WWSv8Ee2Mz7ifMlEe8
 

If J-8 was an attempt to copy the Su-15, as you so previously keep hoping, then how is it any different from the F-15 copying the MiG-25?  The Su-15 can’t maneuver under 200 kph, with its higher wingloading.  
Copy paste, copy past, blah blah blah.

Hey the side profile of the F-16 looks mightily similar to the Ye-8.

Ah ha!  Copy paste!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan-Gurevich_Ye-8#/media/File:Mikoyan-Gurevich_Ye-8_3-view_line_drawing.jpg
 

Bahaha!

 

Come on, don't get so upset over this.

I didn't say it was an attempt, I said it was a consumated fact.

 

Let me guess what you're going to insinuate next:

" J-11's airframe design is in no way, shape or form related to the russian Su-27, it's 100 % purely indigenous production design. " 

(If you believe it strongly, it becomes true.) 

 

All the best !

[PLAAF]

1 hour ago, LowRider88 said:

So finally you reveal your true colors.  Just took a bit of prodding.

1 hour ago, Torbernite said:

"Looks like" never provides reliable logics. Or I can just say, sounds like you are just despising their design capability and just going your own way.

6 hours ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

You'll find that airframe development acts a lot like biological evolution; nature shapes its designs, so a lot of examples will fit certain niches and similarities will arise.

8 hours ago, LowRider88 said:

I think the onus is on you to do the research confirm that assertion.

Why?  Because it looks like something?  Can you be more scientific?

Hahaha, looks like this Jockey guy really triggered a public outrage.

Guys there is really no need to chat him up here.  I have dealt with him before and he is everything you guys said he is and more. That's why I blocked him. If wasn't because of all the quotations I didn't even notice he is there (May be ED should do something about this too, so we can't see the quotations too after block them). Everything had been explained by Deka thoroughly through their Q&A thread. There is no need to discuss them over and over again.

Remember, he is not here to discuss matters, nor debate with you. He is here to make you dance to his tune and he can get satisfaction and enjoyment out of it.
Here, professor Dave explained this type of person better than I do in the later part of his video. (edit: correction, all part of this video)

The best way to deal with this type of troller is to do what I do, block him. When he can't get a response, trust me, it will hurt him, a lot. 
All you need to do is to go to your profile, at the  "ignored user" section and type in his forum name. Very easy.
Here:
https://forum.dcs.world/ignore/

Edited February 23, 2023 by PLAAF

[Torbernite]

 

 

( Also didn't see you intervene at the: "F-15 was an attempt to copy the MiG-25" either... )

 

OK let's do a quiz.

I put the aircraft A and B here.

A and B are both originally designed as an interceptor for high altitude and high speed, while B was developed for several other usage, but A was never put into most of those usage.

A and B have similar intakes design, but A has a fixed intakes and B variable, and B has conical camber while A doesn't. As a result, B is better at dogfight than A.

A and B have some rumor about copy, but their similarity is quite limited and can be well explained in their development history, while the rumor just ignores it and keeps on asking for an explanation for the similarity, which they want.

Now tell me are they MiG-25 and F-15?

Well, it could be Su-15 and J-8II.

The difference is just, your preference.

 

 

Yeah all those other jets were taken into account into the J-8II's development - sure, great ; but does that by itself invalidate the totally striking resemblances with the Su-15 ?

Surely invalidate. I have shown you the development history and it can explain "why the J-8II looks in this style", so logically no need for a different theory for its looks getting a Su-15 involved, if you found them similar, the story and convergent evolution have already told you the reason, what's beyond them is only the coincidence. If you persist in your theory, it's your job to provide more evidence for your theory, such like a document of Chinese espionage to steal a Su-15 print or aircraft or wreckage. So where is it?

 

 

Hahaha, looks like this Jockey guy really triggered a public outrage.

Guys there is really no need to chat him up here.  I have dealt with him before and he is everything you guys said he is and more. That's why I blocked him. If wasn't because of all the quotations I didn't even notice he is there. Everything had been explained by Deka thoroughly through their Q&A thread. There is no need to discuss them over and over again.

Remember, he is not here to discuss matters, nor debate with you. He is here to make you dance to his tune and he can get satisfaction and enjoyment out of it.

Agree. However, discussing with an impenitent guy is never intended to change his mind, but to prevent him from deceiving others. Our forum has too much tolerance to ill-considered rumors and too little to those against them.

[PLAAF]

24 minutes ago, Torbernite said:

Agree. However, discussing with an impenitent guy is never intended to change his mind, but to prevent him from deceiving others. Our forum has too much tolerance to ill-considered rumors and too little to those against them.

That's indeed a noble intention.

[LowRider88]

51 minutes ago, PLAAF said:

Hahaha, looks like this Jockey guy really triggered a public outrage.

Guys there is really no need to chat him up here.  I have dealt with him before and he is everything you guys said he is and more. That's why I blocked him. If wasn't because of all the quotations I didn't even notice he is there (May be ED should do something about this too, so we can't see the quotations too after block them). Everything had been explained by Deka thoroughly through their Q&A thread. There is no need to discuss them over and over again.

Remember, he is not here to discuss matters, nor debate with you. He is here to make you dance to his tune and he can get satisfaction and enjoyment out of it.
Here, professor Dave explained this type of person better than I do in the later part of his video. (edit: correction, all part of this video)

The best way to deal with this type of troller is to do what I do, block him. When he can't get a response, trust me, it will hurt him, a lot. 
All you need to do is to go to your profile, at the  "ignored user" section and type in his forum name. Very easy.
Here:
https://forum.dcs.world/ignore/

 

Good description!

Yep, like talking to a baby 

Just have to close the door sometimes.

[Wyvern]

I just would like to mention that China did copy a lot of designs in the past.
Although i would argue that, this isnt something negative. Its just an step in the Evolution of an Design, first you copy something and use it to learn from its mistakes to become better and make an better product.
To somewhat get onto topic, even if China copied design choices from the Su-15 or if they copied other stuff from the US or other foreign nations, its quite smart.
Why waste money re-inventing someone's working technology, if its cheaper to recreate it.
Also, if China did manage to copy (or "steal") foreign designs, that just means their Intelligence Agencies are better than the foreign ones.

As for the J-11 and the Su-27, I mean, cmon. The J-11 based off the Su-27, even through to the J-16, its obvious. 
The J-15 is quite literally an Reverse Engineered and upgraded Su-33.
J-20 has some similarities to the MiG-1.44/MiG-MFI.
JF-17 seems like its inspired from the F-20 but mixed with an J-7, which in turn is an Upgraded copy of the MiG-21 (although licensed)

As I said, "even if China copied design choices from... ...foreign nations, its quite smart.
Why waste money re-inventing someone's working technology, if its cheaper to recreate it... ...that just means their Intelligence Agencies are better than the foreign ones"

But asides from that, you need to keep in mind how much intel was actually stolen through spies, cooperation in an desperate cold war, and how a lot of planes from an similar Era look very similar. As an example, i've read a long time ago that BAC had an design for an Harrier and Jaguar succession, that shared similarities to the Su-27s and F-15s design.

That explains the similarities in the MiG-25s and F-15s design.

In the Su-15 case, i assume that both Chinese and Soviet Engineers came up with similar Ideas for their designs, similar to how a lot of planes that were designed at the same time.
Especially when considering that the Chinese Probably studied the Soviet designs carefully.
Did the J-8II share similarites with the Su-15? yes. Is it a copy? Most likely not.

I think that is the kind of spirit behind technology, there is only one perfect solution, which can only lead to all the designs being similar, as they all try to be as close to the perfect design as possible.
Hey, thats almost philosophic...

But keep in mind to stay respectful to everyone on here.
If someone is an A-hole, dont be an A-hole yourself, be better: Remain calm and respectful.

Thanks for reading, have a nice weekend.

Edited February 23, 2023 by Wyvern
Added more context and changed wording

[Bananabrai]

11 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

Most of what matters in modern combat is missing or badly modeled in DCS core and the modern planes.

I generally agree with your general point and also love the fact that CW is going to be so much better.
The modern stuff simply cannot give me the same feeling as the CW stuff.

But what precisely would you count to the point I quoted? The word "most" was triggering me to be curiouse.

[Wyvern]

5 minutes ago, Bananabrai said:

The modern stuff simply cannot give me the same feeling as the CW stuff.

I see what you mean, but I have to say, I like getting on in the evening, without having to keep 100% focused, 
I do appreciate having Datalink and Mavericks or JDAMs, which just nice when chilling and watching youtube on the side.

And yes, i could also play Ace Combat if i want to blow up stuff with no effort, but DCS has the better physics ;3

Edited February 23, 2023 by Wyvern

[PLAAF]

6 hours ago, Wyvern said:

I just would like to mention that China did copy a lot of designs in the past.
Although i would argue that, this isnt something negative. Its just an step in the Evolution of an Design, first you copy something and use it to learn from its mistakes to become better and make an better product.
To somewhat get onto topic, even if China copied design choices from the Su-15 or if they copied other stuff from the US or other foreign nations, its quite smart.
Why waste money re-inventing someone's working technology, if its cheaper to recreate it.
Also, if China did manage to copy (or "steal") foreign designs, that just means their Intelligence Agencies are better than the foreign ones.

As for the J-11 and the Su-27, I mean, cmon. The J-11 based off the Su-27, even through to the J-16, its obvious. 
The J-15 is quite literally an Reverse Engineered and upgraded Su-33.
J-20 has some similarities to the MiG-1.44/MiG-MFI.
JF-17 seems like its inspired from the F-20 but mixed with an J-7, which in turn is an Upgraded copy of the MiG-21 (although licensed)

As I said, "even if China copied design choices from... ...foreign nations, its quite smart.
Why waste money re-inventing someone's working technology, if its cheaper to recreate it... ...that just means their Intelligence Agencies are better than the foreign ones"

But asides from that, you need to keep in mind how much intel was actually stolen through spies, cooperation in an desperate cold war, and how a lot of planes from an similar Era look very similar. As an example, i've read a long time ago that BAC had an design for an Harrier and Jaguar succession, that shared similarities to the Su-27s and F-15s design.

That explains the similarities in the MiG-25s and F-15s design.

In the Su-15 case, i assume that both Chinese and Soviet Engineers came up with similar Ideas for their designs, similar to how a lot of planes that were designed at the same time.
Especially when considering that the Chinese Probably studied the Soviet designs carefully.
Did the J-8II share similarites with the Su-15? yes. Is it a copy? Most likely not.

I think that is the kind of spirit behind technology, there is only one perfect solution, which can only lead to all the designs being similar, as they all try to be as close to the perfect design as possible.
Hey, thats almost philosophic...

But keep in mind to stay respectful to everyone on here.
If someone is an A-hole, dont be an A-hole yourself, be better: Remain calm and respectful.

Thanks for reading, have a nice weekend.

 

Well said, well said indeed mein kamerad.

[Top Jockey]

3 hours ago, Wyvern said:

I just would like to mention that China did copy a lot of designs in the past.
Although i would argue that, this isnt something negative. Its just an step in the Evolution of an Design, first you copy something and use it to learn from its mistakes to become better and make an better product.
To somewhat get onto topic, even if China copied design choices from the Su-15 or if they copied other stuff from the US or other foreign nations, its quite smart.
Why waste money re-inventing someone's working technology, if its cheaper to recreate it.
Also, if China did manage to copy (or "steal") foreign designs, that just means their Intelligence Agencies are better than the foreign ones.

As for the J-11 and the Su-27, I mean, cmon. The J-11 based off the Su-27, even through to the J-16, its obvious. 
The J-15 is quite literally an Reverse Engineered and upgraded Su-33.
J-20 has some similarities to the MiG-1.44/MiG-MFI.
JF-17 seems like its inspired from the F-20 but mixed with an J-7, which in turn is an Upgraded copy of the MiG-21 (although licensed)

As I said, "even if China copied design choices from... ...foreign nations, its quite smart.
Why waste money re-inventing someone's working technology, if its cheaper to recreate it... ...that just means their Intelligence Agencies are better than the foreign ones"

But asides from that, you need to keep in mind how much intel was actually stolen through spies, cooperation in an desperate cold war, and how a lot of planes from an similar Era look very similar. As an example, i've read a long time ago that BAC had an design for an Harrier and Jaguar succession, that shared similarities to the Su-27s and F-15s design.

That explains the similarities in the MiG-25s and F-15s design.

In the Su-15 case, i assume that both Chinese and Soviet Engineers came up with similar Ideas for their designs, similar to how a lot of planes that were designed at the same time.
Especially when considering that the Chinese Probably studied the Soviet designs carefully.
Did the J-8II share similarites with the Su-15? yes. Is it a copy? Most likely not.

I think that is the kind of spirit behind technology, there is only one perfect solution, which can only lead to all the designs being similar, as they all try to be as close to the perfect design as possible.
Hey, thats almost philosophic...

But keep in mind to stay respectful to everyone on here.
If someone is an A-hole, dont be an A-hole yourself, be better: Remain calm and respectful.

Thanks for reading, have a nice weekend.

 

 

Very good post.

But that bold might upset the comunist party errand kids (although sometimes they feign it doesn't).

- they get their egos hurt, if anyone says they copied something

- but when they say the F-15 is a MiG-25 copy, it's all right

 

You're absolutely right about being calm and respectful ... but quite frankly, I feel the 'modus operandi' in this specific sub-forum is :

- when it comes to chinese aircraft, I sometimes notice a bit of unhealthy fanaticism

- when facing a different opinion, they falsely act as if highly offended or insulted

- feign offended, to try 'justify' an hostile (disrespectful) tone of speech

- the bad manners come up, and a somewhat visible dislike for free speech too

 

Quoting @Torbernite :

" Our forum has too much tolerance to ill-considered rumors and too little to those against them. " 

First, this isn't your forum, it's ED's forum.

Second, by that kind of posture, where are you ? North Korea ??  

 

I've also praised the JF-17 and J-20 airframe designs, but the errand boys ignored that.

... because the priority is, trying to dismiss other not so praising different opinions. 

There sure are interesting aircraft in DEKA, but more people don't come to this sub-forum, because sometimes it can be difficult to exchange honest opinions.

 

No ill intent whatsoever against anyone, have a nice weekend !

[LowRider88]

9 hours ago, Wyvern said:

I just would like to mention that China did copy a lot of designs in the past.
Although i would argue that, this isnt something negative. Its just an step in the Evolution of an Design, first you copy something and use it to learn from its mistakes to become better and make an better product.
To somewhat get onto topic, even if China copied design choices from the Su-15 or if they copied other stuff from the US or other foreign nations, its quite smart.
Why waste money re-inventing someone's working technology, if its cheaper to recreate it.
Also, if China did manage to copy (or "steal") foreign designs, that just means their Intelligence Agencies are better than the foreign ones.

As for the J-11 and the Su-27, I mean, cmon. The J-11 based off the Su-27, even through to the J-16, its obvious. 
The J-15 is quite literally an Reverse Engineered and upgraded Su-33.
J-20 has some similarities to the MiG-1.44/MiG-MFI.
JF-17 seems like its inspired from the F-20 but mixed with an J-7, which in turn is an Upgraded copy of the MiG-21 (although licensed)

As I said, "even if China copied design choices from... ...foreign nations, its quite smart.
Why waste money re-inventing someone's working technology, if its cheaper to recreate it... ...that just means their Intelligence Agencies are better than the foreign ones"

But asides from that, you need to keep in mind how much intel was actually stolen through spies, cooperation in an desperate cold war, and how a lot of planes from an similar Era look very similar. As an example, i've read a long time ago that BAC had an design for an Harrier and Jaguar succession, that shared similarities to the Su-27s and F-15s design.

That explains the similarities in the MiG-25s and F-15s design.

In the Su-15 case, i assume that both Chinese and Soviet Engineers came up with similar Ideas for their designs, similar to how a lot of planes that were designed at the same time.
Especially when considering that the Chinese Probably studied the Soviet designs carefully.
Did the J-8II share similarites with the Su-15? yes. Is it a copy? Most likely not.

I think that is the kind of spirit behind technology, there is only one perfect solution, which can only lead to all the designs being similar, as they all try to be as close to the perfect design as possible.
Hey, thats almost philosophic...

But keep in mind to stay respectful to everyone on here.
If someone is an A-hole, dont be an A-hole yourself, be better: Remain calm and respectful.

Thanks for reading, have a nice weekend.

 

Good words, with good intentions.

Thanks for the reminders, but for me I was clam all the way.

But if someone is being a jerk, why should I have to be respectful?  I respect everyone else here.

Unfortunately this forum doesn’t manage these racist people very well.

I note there were some trolls here, and the moderators censored me for commenting that there are trolls here.

 

Regarding the J-20, I don’t see the commonality.  I don’t know of any other plane that is a canard delta configuration, that also has LERX, and is stealth.  And now is one of those that has a 2 seat version.  Neither the MiG, or any other aircraft, pre or post production is similar.  We can speculate all we want if there was any copying but in this case the copying claims seem superficial.

PLAAF has posted a great thread on the history of the J-8 and includes pics of the different versions of the J-9, one of which is far more similar to the J-20 than the MiG.

[Torbernite]

 

Regarding the J-20, I don’t see the commonality.  I don’t know of any other plane that is a canard delta configuration, that also has LERX, and is stealth.  And now is one of those that has a 2 seat version.  Neither the MiG, or any other aircraft, pre or post production is similar.  We can speculate all we want if there was any copying but in this case the copying claims seem superficial.

PLAAF has posted a great thread on the history of the J-8 and includes pics of the different versions of the J-9, one of which is far more similar to the J-20 than the MiG.

I have to say you two made my dream atmosphere. While I don't agree with the J-20-MiG similarity either, Wyvern also raised it up quite cautiously and calmly, and good to see you made it clearer.

Even exact genetics and evolution studies went through an age of morphology (and even now morphology is still important) before molecular biology comes to make a mess.

I have accepted the truth that we normal fans can hardly find better way than "visual inspection" to rise a query on the relationship of aircrafts. Even the most precise guy can't avoid that before getting more info of the development and history.

In fact, most people in the forum seem to know little about those unproduced early Chinese projects, which can prevent many argue here. I hope someone can make such a brief introduction and it could be useful. I would try to find some more info myself.

Edited February 24, 2023 by Torbernite