Posted on 11/17/2009 7:28:43 AM PST by myknowledge
Great, just great. Remember when the Big Zero and John McCain both told us we didn’t need our F-22s cuz we had no one to fight against, using them?
Well, what do you say now, you two fools?
Oh yeah, and the cost was one or two billion dollars to keep the lines open?
Just a spit in the bucket compared to the bank bailouts, eh?
Thanks McCain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Chinese are building a F-22 knockoff, the J-xx, and the Russians are expected to fly their new design, the Sukhoi SU-50 Pak FA next year as well. (The Russian version of the F-22)
Unfortunately (and to my great puzzlement), Israel has illegally transferred much of our technology to the Chinese as well.
“The J-10 is based on the Israeli Lavi”
Oft-repeated, but false.
Really? Can you please provide the source that says that it is not?
http://www.janes.com/news/defence/systems/jdw/jdw080519_2_n.shtml
Chinese J-10 ‘benefited from the Lavi project’
By Robert Hewson
19 May 2008
Russian aerospace engineers have confirmed to Jane’s that China’s Chengdu J-10 fighter aircraft benefited from significant, direct input from Israel’s Lavi programme - including access to the Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI) Lavi aircraft itself.
In a number of interviews Jane’s has talked at length with several engineers, designers and technical specialists - some of whom have been working with their Chinese counterparts for decades and have had first-hand experience on Chinese military projects. They have provided detailed accounts of the assistance given to various Chinese manufacturers and their military aircraft projects. This has included extensive design and performance modelling, wind-tunnel testing and advanced aerodynamic design input.
Senior Russian engineers who spoke to Jane’s recalled their many visits to Chengdu, and elsewhere in China, some of which began in the 1980s. Jane’s was told how Chengdu officials of the highest level stated how they had one of the IAI Lavi prototypes in their facilities. Describing his conversations with Chengdu concerning possession of a Lavi aircraft, one Jane’s source commented: “I did not consider that to be a revelation ... doesn’t everyone know that already?”
It is not possible to independently verify the Russian comments. The charge of Lavi technology transfer has been made before, but this time the claims come from individuals with sustained personal experience of the programme. Both Chinese and Israeli officials have long refuted any purported links between the J-10 and the Lavi.
234 of 785 words
© 2008 Jane’s Information Group
End of non-subscriber extract
Any comments?
Oft-repeated, but a false rumor started by the Russians who claimed a prototype Lavi was moved to China.
I am a former IAF officer, and I was involved in the Lavi project.
First an appeal to common sense: look at the J-9, which predates Lavi. The evoltution is clear.
Second, the whole prototype-in-China business is easily refuted. When the Lavi was cancelled on 1987, a total of five airframes had been built. Prototypes #1 and #2 were completed prototypes, while #3, #4, and #5 were incomplete (#4 and #5 being little more than the basic frame).
Parts from unit #1 and #2 were pulled to complete unit #3 as the private-venture technology demonstrator (TD) aircraft.
#3 remains in the IAI hanger, and I’ve seen it myself.
The gutted unit #2 was put in the Israeli Air Force museum at the Hatzerim Airbase for static display, and the rest (gutted #1 and #4, & #5) were parted out.
That said, there WAS a technology transfer, but NOT of American technology.
Certain people ILLEGALLY sold elements of the Israeli-made ELM-2021 radar system, which can simultaneously track six air targets and lock on to the four most threatening targets for destruction.
They were fired/prosecuted, as appropriate.
This illegally-sold radar system probably has made its way into a number of Chinese and other enemy countries.
Yes, see post below.
I would also like to point out the lack of civil action by our US aviation counterparts.
Lockheed and General Dynamics (who have a vested money interest) found no basis for any civil action or mandatory fines and did not even try to bring suit.
Indeed, as part of an IAI stock offering, Lockheed and GD issued a “no evidence” letter that was included in the stock packet because the false Jane’s Defense rumors were crushing the stock price.
I am encouraged by your reply.
As I alluded to in my post, it would not make any sense for Israel to double cross the US in this way.
I believe (not 100%) that I first read about this issue in Bill Gertz “Betrayal”, and have since ran in to news about this issue from time to time.
Thanks for the information.
Thank you very much!
Pretty tough to hide it if you're accumulating hundreds and thousands of man-hours of air-to-air combat training, since you have to be up in the air with a jet and all. If the Chinese were doing that, we would know.
They aren't.
We are.
No other nation's pilots can compete with ours, overall.
Any clever Chinese military planner would realize the main source of American Air Superiority is superior pilot training. That’s probably why they have deployed thousands of missiles which can be used to kill as many U.S pilots on the ground/carrier as possible.
The surviving pilots who do take to the air would then be outnumbered 10 to 1 by Chinese fighters.
Any competent adversary will try to fight dirty or only on their own terms not ours.
Also, the Chicoms would prefer to overwhelm the deployed Raptor forces with larger numbers of Shenyang J-11B Flankers (Chinese upgraded variant of Sukhoi Su-27SK) and Chengdu J-10s. Think P-51 + P-47 vs Me 262 during WWII.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/11607526/F22-Raptor-Americas-Next-Lethal-War-Machine
Download it in PDF format.
Remember, we have a few "clever military planners" of our own.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.