U.S. Will Counter Chinese Arms Buildup

NYTimes.com ^ | ELISABETH BUMILLER

[Allthatucantleavebehind]

U.S. Will Counter Chinese Arms Buildup

“I’ve been concerned about the development of the antiship cruise and ballistic missiles ever since I took this job,” he added. “We knew they were working on a stealth aircraft. I think that what we’ve seen is that they may be somewhat further ahead in the development of that aircraft than our intelligence had earlier predicted.”

Mr. Gates said he hoped his talks with Chinese leaders would reduce the need for more American weaponry in the Pacific. He also said that if Chinese leaders considered the United States a declining power because of the financial crisis, they were wrong.

“I’ve watched this sort of cyclical view of American decline come around two or three times, perhaps most dramatically in the latter half of the 1970s,” Mr. Gates said. “And my general line for those both at home and around the world who think the U.S. is in decline is that history’s dustbins are filled with countries that underestimated the resilience of the United States.”

[spetznaz]

Goodness, I do not care about the PakFa ...and anyways, it is less capable than the Raptor. There is no nation comoing up with a manned platform anywhere as good as the F-22 Raptor. Interestingly I did not even bring up an issue of PakFa vs J-20 ....I was talking about the J-10 as compared to the Rafale, and about Chinese tendencies to make their 'original' creations seem so good when they cannot even make a simple jet engine that works as it is supposed to. I guess you had no response on how an anemic single-engined 4th gen vibrating cr@p like the J-10 could be compared to an advanced Western airframe like the Rafale ...apart from both having canards.

I was serious though about Chengdu bringing someone with greater 'technique information' than you. Maybe several pay grades above you.

[Allthatucantleavebehind]

Hmmm, nice try: Does this looks like a MiG-1.44 to you?

[spetznaz]

So says the guy who compared the J-10 to the Rafale because they both have that convoluted term you used for close-coupled canards. Oh, and yes ...it does look like the MiG-MFI. The only major difference is that the intakes are on the side rather than the bottom. Just as the 'original' J-10 looks like the Lavi, and the 'original' JF-17 looks like the project-33 concept from MiG. It seems the world is still waiting for a 100% original product from China. All you guys do is take existing concepts or designs, and then 'invent' something that you proceed to make seem like manna from heaven, when you cannot even make efficient and effective replicas of 1980s engine designs. Chengdu should be ashamed!

MiG-MFI aka the 'original' J-20:

MiG-1.42 ...move the intakes to the side and make the front slightly more shaped, and you have the 'original' J-20.

The MiG-MFI:

The TOTALLY 'original' J-20:

Lavi aka the 'original'J-10:

Here is the Lavi ....basically lengthen it a bit, and make crude attachments for the intake to the fuselage, and you have the 'original' J-10 (oh, and again ...the J-10 is in NO WAY similar to the Rafale). The Lavi:

Here is the 'original' J-10:

MiG-33 concept aka the 'original' JF-17:

Then you have the project-33 by MiG that was sold to China by Russia, and ended up being slightly changed into the 'original' JF-17.

Here is the 'original' JF-17:

I could do the same for your submarines, even your rifles! Face it ...all China does is make sub-par clones of Western and Russian designs. Then claim they are as good as Rafales and Raptors, when they cannot even get an engine design or a 1980s PESA RADAR straight.

[ponder life]

In fact Chinese aircraft won't even come out to play tag when US aircraft are in the YELLOW SEA!

Overall, I would have to agree with you assessment (despite your brashness). China will have to eat humble pie for at least two more decades.

But keep in mind, short of a deliberate confrontation, China will continue to close the gap. China's weakness with the US is her current level of military technology. But no one, not even the US, will be able to match China's ability to build, build and build. An American admiral even conceded that it would be foolish, in the long term, to ever match China one for one in hardware. In other words, once China does have a design of a particular hardward they feel is worth building en masse, whether it be an aircraft carrier, fighter jet, etc., she could crank out greater quantities than the US hope to.

The US will need to continue to keep the technological gap wide enough so as to make it futile for China to ever enter into a mass build up. I doubt the US can maintain the deterent technological gap over the next couple of decades.

[Allthatucantleavebehind]

EuroFighter 2000:

Rafale:

JAS-39:

J-10B:


Sure looks like a F-16, LOL:


Btw, I tell you what does look like means: Su-27 and F-15, LOL:

Su-27 and the cruel joke called "PAK-FA/T-50":

And don't DODGE MY question, joker,TELL ME, DOES THIS FIGHTER LOOKS LIKE A MIG-1.44, LOL?

And we all know, the Russian's best fighter looks like this, its so unlucky that China have not stolen enough russian designs/techs, otherwise they would have build as good as a PAK-FA, hehehe:

[spetznaz]

My dear ATUCLB, you keep bringing up comparisons between the Eurofighter/Rafale and the J-10. I did not say the J-10 was a F-16 ....it is actually less capable than the latest block F-16s. I said it was a product of the aborted Lavi that the Chinese, as usual, copied. You must have terminally atrophied visual acuity if you think my comparison between the 'original' J-10 and the Lavi is a comparison between the J-10 and the Viper. As usual you keep jumping from topic to topic when you are unable to answer something I bring up (e.g. you jump from Rafales to PakFas to J-20s to now comparisons between F-16s and J-10s when I never even brought the issue up).

Ridiculous.

As you may tell by now, your rancid Chinese mumblings are not going to get the same 'wow' reception on FR as they may on Chinese forums. Also, AGAIN, you cannot compare a SINGLE ENGINED, POOR AVIONICS, POOR MMI, POOR ENGINE (actually worse than poor), ANEMIC SENSOR-SUITE, POOR T/W, POOR WINGLOADING, Chinese clone of the Lavi to a TWIN-ENGINED, HIGHLY ADVANCED AVIONICS, SUPERLATIVE SENSOR-SUITES, SUPERLATIVE WINGLOADING AND T/W, ARGUABLY THE MOST ADVANCED MMI (until the F-35 comes into being), HIGHLY ADVANCED ENGINE, ONE OF THE MOST ADVANCED ECM/ECCM SUITES plane like the Eurofighter and Rafale. The J-10 is simply a single-engine clone ....just because the Chengdu piece of crap has canards doesn't mean it is fit to wipe the butt off a Rafale.

As for the question about the J-20 and MiG-MFI ...I have already answered it in my prior post (as well as throwing you a bonus in the form of where the 'original' J-10 and JF-17 came from). I even put comparative pictures. I understand that you're probably not the smartest Chinese to try and troll FR (there was one a month before you who at least kept it going for over 50 posts before he got banned), and your posts do expose quite well the myopia that infects the average Chinese blogger who feels their equipment is advanced, but the sad fact is that the Chinese military (for all its development over the last twenty years) is simply not that advanced. Most of your airforce, for instance, is still flying what are effectively 1960s Soviet-era designs warmed over with some dim sum. Yet the average Chinese is stupid enough to compare the J-10 with the Eurofighter and the Rafale ...yes, stupid. Because all you are basing it on is the presence of canards.

China has never developed a completely original design, whether it is a simple motorcycle (poor copies of Japanese designs), vehicles (rather sad looking copies of Japanese, South Korean and Western designs), electronics (want a dual-SIM iPhone ...even though Apple doesn't have dual-SIM phones) and so on. It is the same with your military. You make inferior copies that look somewhat similar on the outside, and are totally not-to-par on the inside (again, engine and RADAR issues galore) and then claim they are world-beaters.

All China does is make the US take note and spend more, as Gates said just two days ago. All this chest thumping by you guys only makes YOUR position worse, because now the US will start putting more effort into further developing its military. Already the Chinese armed forces are probably a generation to a generation-and-a-half (according to Gates) behind the US. Soon that gap will go to a generation-and-a-half to two generations behind.

FReepers are actually quite grateful to you and your kind. The silly blustering by your 'wise leaders' and show-casing of specific anti-American capabilities have finally made even Gates and the Obama administration to get some sense and prudence knocked into them.

BTW, just to avoid more photos of Typhoons and Rafales and J-10s ...the J-10 is not, and will never be, anything close to a either of the twin-engined Eurocanards. When the J-10 is mature, maybe 10-15 years from now, it will be comparable to a Block 50 (maybe a gelded Block 60) F-16. Assuming you guys solve the engine issues, upgrade the avionics, finally sort out the pernicious engine problems. You get a nice F-16 from it. However, it will never be a Rafale.

[sukhoi-30mki]

The PAK-FA being a cruel joke??? The J-20 wonderjet would have remained on paper without Russian help including its engines.

If the J-10 was so cool compared to the Flanker, why is China still building the Flanker (albeit the J-11 copy)?? Shots of exercises in places like Tibet seem to be featuring the Flankers more.

[Citizen of the Savage Nation]

“I’ve never understood why the Chinese (and I assume you are Chinese - joined Dec 31 2010, weird/convoluted English syntax, masturbatory fantasies about the J-10 ....) think their copies are in any way comparable to advanced Western designs.”

Good call...I was thinking the same thing. Also, I can’t help but notice anytime a story comes out about this plane being better than that plane, just consider the source. The Rafale better than Typhoon because France says so? The Typhoon better than F-22 because EADS and their media lackeys say so? And e best yet, the J-20 better than most anything because e Chinese say so? Sure.

[Praxeologue]

for China, SSBN is not their priority, at least before they get Taiwan

How would Chinese control of Taiwan change the desirability of SSBN deployment?

[spetznaz]

Considering the fact the convential airframe F-22 is not very good at air-combat comparing with the ground-breaking unique airframe of J-20 (lifting-body co-plane canards blending with leading edges), when a F-22 is facing a J-20, the result may not much different than trying to pitting a SU-27 against a J-10.

I had not even seen this piece of cr@p. Goodness, you are saying that the F-22 is 'not very good at air-combat' compared to the 'ground-breaking' J-20! Do you know how astoundingly stupid that is? Even for one as you?

[sukhoi-30mki]

I can’t imagine the kind of reactions that will be raging on PLA fan forums once the J-20 is flown (latest reports indicate it has indeed flown).

[spetznaz]

Did you see his post (number 25) on the J-20 being better than the F-22 Raptor (and the Raptor being poor in air-to-air)? The Chinese are ridiculous.

[Fury]

I can show you many Chinese academic research papers on the advancements in these area (radar, ECMs, weaponarys) as well..

If you would post the links to some of these papers, that would be appreciated.

[rbmillerjr]

Let us know when China feels like coming out of the baby pool.

[spetznaz]

Already happening. :)

[rbmillerjr]

“Did you see his post (number 25) on the J-20 being better than the F-22 Raptor (and the Raptor being poor in air-to-air)? The Chinese are ridiculous.”

Indoctrination been berry berry good for Chinese.