Russia infuriated with Chinese export copies of Su-27 jet fighters

swerve

Super Moderator
Russia is No.1 in the world in military sales ...
Afraid not. The USA exports far more. Well over twice as much in 2006, for example.

SIPRI calculated that Russia exported more weapons (not military equipment overall) than the USA a few years ago, but that was at values set by SIPRI, not revenue, major items only, & transfers, not sales. It counted free & nearly free transfers, such as Leopard 1s handed over to Greece for the cost of shipping (to sweeten their Leopard 2 purchase), as sales, almost equivalent to new equipment, & ex-DDR MiG-29s given to Poland for 1 Euro as if they'd been charged at full price.

German transfers of secondhand tanks, etc. put Germany into 3rd place in that ranking, despite the low revenue from them, & Gorshkov boosted the Russian figure enormously. It's not an accurate indicator of the export success of Russian (or German) military industries.

But even according to that measure, the USA has been ahead (again) since 2005. In revenue from sales of military equipment the USA has been consistently top, far ahead of Russia, & the UK is not too far behind Russia.
 

tphuang

Super Moderator
The Type-79 is still a T-54 development..... even the Type-85 still has distinctive features of Soviet tank design.
I mean something within the past decade.

It has a smaller airframe. That means harder to modernize.

Also, my knowledge here is limited, does the J-11B carry anything GPS compatible in terms of navigations and targetting? And what's the range on it's radar in terms of air to air?
yes for GPS. Smaller airframe, I have no idea where you read that from, it's smaller than su-30s for obvious reasons, but it should be about the same dimensions.

As for radar, it should be better than Zhuk-MSE in terms of range, probably more than Bar also. Remember, J-10's radar was quoted as 150 km vs fighter sized target and J-11's radar radius is 1/3 larger. I have a post on this in my blog.

well i doubt a J11 is equal to a MKI,let alone be superior.i didnt read anywhere that J11 is superior ,from what i read from many articles and news ch the SU-35 is the only one superior to the MKI and i saw the show even on national geographic channel.

in these forums all i see ,is people supporting the aircraft there nations have including many moderators.
i like planes irrespective has to who has it.i may be a newbie in this forum but i have been reading about sukhoi from the past 12 years.hell i even have a radio controled sukhoi with turbine engine(well still havent bought the engine has yet) .

well russia will be pissed why shouldnt they i mean GM was pissed when some chinese manufacturer copied there vechicle SPARK,also another chinese maker copied honda SRV the chinese named it FRV.so those companies started sueing the chinese .
in that case, read what other people have to say.

What does it matter when the chinese have already received their su-30mk's.
they are no good.

People have mentioned that the Su-35 is superior to MKI model but correct me if I’m wrong the Su-35 isn’t in full production yet? So nobody really knows if Russia improved on the non Russian systems built into the Su-30 Flanker MKI? With the more powerful engines and I think lighter weight one can assume a little better flying performance but still doesn’t mean the sub systems are better. Think about it India went with the non Russian systems for a reason and don’t seem to be jumping on the Su-35. Does anybody know if India upgrading any of there older Flankers with similar Russian sub systems in place of the non Russian made systems bought earlier? That would be a good benchmark I think most users would rather order the entire aircraft including sub systems unless it’s just too costly to replace.
more modern avionics architecture, better T/W ratio, lower RCS, better radar and in general, the production capability of KNAAPO is better than IAPO.


Anyway, I summed it up in my blog as the following:
"First, I'd like to address the issue of the AL-31F engine. There is no doubt in my mind that most if not all of those engines are going to the existing fleet of Russian flankers. The fact is that AL-31F have really short service life, so it shouldn't be a surprise that China needs a large order of this engine as replacements for the ones on the existing aircrafts. The other issue is that production rate of WS-10A has reached the point where China simply doesn't need to buy AL-31F for new J-11Bs. If the flanker production rate is 17 per year as Pinkov previously stated, then having mass production of WS-10A should more than cover that + a portion of J-10s. And it's no secret that the Russians have been following the progress of J-11B development as much as they can. Earlier this year, one of the big shrimps stated that Russians accidentally saw the J-11B production lines and were surprised by the tooling and quality of the fighters. It was to the point that they decided to cut off on the supply of parts to China. This did not actually cripple J-11B program, but simply helped the domestic industry which was previously denied due to the powerful middlemen who were making money off the export transactions.

So, why now? Of course, the official explanation is that China is violating the terms of the agreement and that they are going to export to other countries. But in reality, it doesn't appear that China has any intention exporting a fighter that they can't get enough of. In fact, one of the problems of PLA is that SAC can't produce enough to supply both the navy and the air force. I'm not sure if this is a problem with SAC as mentioned by Pinkov or a problem with the suppliers. Either way, with China's need for strike fighters and naval fighters, SAC won't be looking at any export orders for a while. Even the big shrimps on Chinese bbs have mentioned that China can't even export the original su-27sk without Russian approval. As for the other violation, it's clear at this point that China has yet to even reach the original goal of 200 flankers. They produced 95 J-11s with various degrees of Russian contents. We've probably had at most 20 J-11Bs so far. So, the Russians are simply complaining because they are not getting the money from China ordering their parts for the aircraft. This is really ridiculous, since what Russians are willing to offer to China (N-001VE) is so outdated. Of course, they are not willing to offer the more advanced Irbis radar, because they want China to buy su-35 straight up. So, if they are not willing to offer avionics and engines that are up to par (compared to indigenous production), what right do they have to complain that China is using their own (and more advanced) avionics? The Russians must know all of this. Why are they still complaining? Well, they know they are not going to get any more orders for su-33/35 from China (despite what they are claiming to Pinkov) after seeing the success of J-11 program, so they are simply trying to get any money they can from China at this point. The threat of discontinuing military cooperations is certainly not going to scare that many people in PLA. In fact, it has been China that has canceled those annual meetings due to the problems with the IL-76 contract.
"
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Well I dont understand a word of what you have just write. :)

Take a look at Russian weapon deliveries in 2007

http://mdb.cast.ru/mdb/4-2007/item_5/article_2/

.. Have you similar specs to show for Britain or US ... you said Britain is right after Russia witch I find hard to belive .. even US (althrow it could be)

Have you similar specs?
It's perfectly clear: Russia has never sold more than the USA. Russia shipped greater quantities (just) of heavy weapons, including secondhand & discounted items, for a short period a few years ago. Is that clear enough?

I can't be bothered to hunt down all the items, but in financial terms, the USA delivered about $14 billion worth, Russia about $5.8 bn, & the UK $3.3 bn in 2006. In terms of contracts, it was USA $16.9 bn, Russia $8.7 bn, UK $3.1 bn.

I note that several of those Russian arms sales were for upgrades or refurbishment of weapons sold - or given away - by the USSR, & two of the biggest customers are under embargo by Western suppliers. Very competitive. :D
 

flyboyEB

New Member
I can't be bothered to hunt down all the items, but in financial terms, the USA delivered about $14 billion worth, Russia about $5.8 bn, & the UK $3.3 bn in 2006. In terms of contracts, it was USA $16.9 bn, Russia $8.7 bn, UK $3.1 bn.
Out of curiosity, is Russian equipment dirt cheap compared to Western stuff or is there not much difference? I'm guessing that you'll pay more for (arguably better) US/British equipment than Russian.
 

Waylander

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
At least for heavy ground equipment one pays more for western equipment. One just has to look at the recent BMP-3, T-90,etc. deals and compare them with modern Leo IIs, CV90,...
 

Falstaff

New Member
Why don't you go ahead and prove it? I dare you. Post pictures of J-10 01 without the bars and without attempting any PS on them. I got pictures of J-10 01 myself, probably more than you will ever have, some of them taken early in the project and none of them were without the bars. And it was no aircraft engineer that speculated the plate would have vibrations; it was KANWA's Pinkov which knows nothing on these matters at all, but claimed it was due to the weight of the engine tunnel that would force these vibrations.
Now calm down a bit. I'm searching my HD backups as I told you. As soon as I find something I'll send it to you. Please forgive me for not having the whole day to do so. And you misunderstood me: It was a friend of mine, who is an aircraft engineer and studied at the same university and now works for BMW-RollsRoyce. And yes, you probably have more pictures and you know everything better than I do, you can run faster and you're a superior cook. Satisfied? If I find out the pictures I remember are PSed I will officially confess I was wrong.
 

crobato

New Member
Go ahead and if you can produce those pictures if ever. And you are right, I have a huge collection of J-10 pictures I have accumulated for years and years now tracking the evolution and progress of the plane, and includes that of the J-10 01. And I have never never seen it without the braces. And as I said, braces are commonly seen when you have intake diverter ramps this close to the skin of the fuselage, because you are drawing air near the boundary layer, which is highly compressed. That will naturally put stresses on the ramp. Actually, the braces on the J-10 is holding the intake, not the ramp itself, but it is understood if you design an intake with a splitter drawing air near the boundary layer, you're going to deal with these issues. Put it this way, the J-8II's intake also has these braces if you look between the intake splitter and the fuselage, and the J-10's intake is very similar to the J-8II's turned sidewards.
 
Last edited:

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
I mean something within the past decade.
Aren't the chinese claiming to have developed the HQ-17 based on the S-300?

yes for GPS. Smaller airframe, I have no idea where you read that from, it's smaller than su-30s for obvious reasons, but it should be about the same dimensions.

As for radar, it should be better than Zhuk-MSE in terms of range, probably more than Bar also. Remember, J-10's radar was quoted as 150 km vs fighter sized target and J-11's radar radius is 1/3 larger. I have a post on this in my blog.
You said it's worse the PESA or AESA. The MKI carries PESA.

So, why now? Of course, the official explanation is that China is violating the terms of the agreement and that they are going to export to other countries. But in reality, it doesn't appear that China has any intention exporting a fighter that they can't get enough of. In fact, one of the problems of PLA is that SAC can't produce enough to supply both the navy and the air force. I'm not sure if this is a problem with SAC as mentioned by Pinkov or a problem with the suppliers. Either way, with China's need for strike fighters and naval fighters, SAC won't be looking at any export orders for a while. Even the big shrimps on Chinese bbs have mentioned that China can't even export the original su-27sk without Russian approval. As for the other violation, it's clear at this point that China has yet to even reach the original goal of 200 flankers. They produced 95 J-11s with various degrees of Russian contents. We've probably had at most 20 J-11Bs so far. So, the Russians are simply complaining because they are not getting the money from China ordering their parts for the aircraft. This is really ridiculous, since what Russians are willing to offer to China (N-001VE) is so outdated. Of course, they are not willing to offer the more advanced Irbis radar, because they want China to buy su-35 straight up. So, if they are not willing to offer avionics and engines that are up to par (compared to indigenous production), what right do they have to complain that China is using their own (and more advanced) avionics? The Russians must know all of this. Why are they still complaining? Well, they know they are not going to get any more orders for su-33/35 from China (despite what they are claiming to Pinkov) after seeing the success of J-11 program, so they are simply trying to get any money they can from China at this point. The threat of discontinuing military cooperations is certainly not going to scare that many people in PLA. In fact, it has been China that has canceled those annual meetings due to the problems with the IL-76 contract.
"
So the contract was for 200 Su-27SK to be license built in China. If China produces more then 200 Su-27SK/J-11B would that not violate the contract? You yourself mentioned high need for the planes.

Russia is No.1 in the world in military sales and those are increasing each year ..
Garbage Viktor, garbage. Listen to swerve. He has his numbers right. By the way MDB, a quite reputable publication, never claimed Russia was No.1 on the arms market. That is a claim you yourself have made based on practically nothing.
 

crobato

New Member
@ Crobado .. few questions

1. When will Beidu become operational?

2. What about China sea surveilence satelites that where suposed to guide China antiship balistic missiles (As I read few of them (1-2)have being lounched but they last only few years.
Beidou is operational and recently has been upgraded with new satellites. As for surveillance satellites, what do you mean they last only a few years? They are still there, operating but rendered obsolete by newer satellites. The "weather" (note quotation marks) Feiyun satellite used as an ASAT target was still operational, by the fact it could still heed commands and change orbits, but its functionality has long been overtaken by newer sats. China appears to have a record year last year sending up satellites and the plans are even more this year. Its almost like every month they're shooting up something to the sky.

3. I sow China has stoped producing destroyers (only two 051C and 052C produced) .. whys that?

Tnx
They produced two 052B, two 052C and two 051C. That's six destroyers in seven years. One reason for temporarily stopping and I mean temporarily stopping is that the shipyard making the 052C has been relocating the last two years or so, and has recently finished. It is expected that it will now start with the 052D, following the experiences of the 052C.

Another is that China is making the 054 series, and these frigates are almost physically as large as any destroyer, looking at the photos when the ships are side by side against a Sovremanny and even a visiting Arleigh Burke. The 054s clearly overlap into the destroyer role, much larger than the Ludas. I see the 052x series to be produced in limited numbers, but the 054x line to be much greater in numbers. So far six has been produced, two 054, four 054A, four ships alone being finished and commissioned in the space of a single year. And two more hulls are already spotted under construction.
 

crobato

New Member
So the contract was for 200 Su-27SK to be license built in China. If China produces more then 200 Su-27SK/J-11B would that not violate the contract? You yourself mentioned high need for the planes.
The contract was for China to have the option to purchase at least 200 kits, with varying degrees of Russian content, as a crutch to assist China to learn how to build the plane.

As for the "smaller" airframe, I don't know where this claim is at, every picture I have seen on the J-11B show it to be absolutely the same size as the J-11 that preceded it down to a tee. In fact, physically both planes are completely identical.

It is not the airframe that is smaller, but the fact the plane is several hundred pounds lighter, due to the substitution of composite and the use of lighter avionics. The picture of the KLJ-4 radar's back systems appears to only take half the volume of a N001.

The planes should have Beidou and commercial GPS as standard equipment, that's standard PLA fare for their modern equipment and extends to other things as well, considering they even got digital PDAs with Beidou for the standard troops. However, commercial GPS is not relied on during combat.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
This needs to stay on track at a civilised level. If it degenerates to ranting and defensive national hysteria then it will get locked for a few days
 

crobato

New Member
So.... China has an unlimited production license?
To be absolutely sure, the contract document has to be made public, which is not going to happen. China apparently treats it like the Z-9/Dauphine license. This is not a new development; Shenyang AC has a mock up of the Su-27 with PL-12s under the wing since 2001 in its corporate entrance hall, with the numbers "2001" on it. Russians go through Shenyang often. The Russians had seven years to nip this in the bud. China originally wanted a hybrid, where they can use the template to fit Chinese avionics and weapons such as PL-12 and YJ-83s and so on, to standardize with the rest of the aircraft. The Russians keep insisting on pushing a 100 percent Russian designed template, with major avionics and missile components still sourced from Russia to protect their own market, and at the same time, they want to keep the Chinese on a "degraded" state. Note that Chinese originally wanted the Zhuk-MSE, probably integrated with the PL-12 and YJ-83, but I wonder if the Russian general staff would allow such, since that would make superior to their own airplanes in the RuAF. The problem is that even within the PLAAF, everything even the J-7Gs to the J-8F are now using slotted array planar radars, but the Russians insist the Chinese should still use a Twist Cassegrain on the radar? Why does the Russians insist in forcing the Chinese to have a cumbersome dual logistical structure, where one side has to stock and maintain R-77s, while another side uses PL-12s, where both sides are not interchangeable?

I think the Russians had every opportunity to partner in an originally planned hybrid, but as talks collapsed and degenerated, and even the Russians withholding components, the Chinese simply engineered every Russian component out of the plane to make it 100% autonomously produced.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
So the dispute is one over the nature of the contract. If this goes to any sort of international arbitration we should be able to find out.
 

crobato

New Member
Unfortunately, reverse engineering isn't illegal, and trade disputes do not cover both arms trade and any matter of national security. Any country has the right to withhold information vital to its national security and that's clear even by international law. Which means that the Russians have zero recourse here other than to curtail their own exports to China, which would also hurt themselves more.
 

Firehorse

Banned Member
Well, the Chinese invented silk, gunpowder, compass, paper, stirrups, mines, rockets, etc.
All those were reverse-engineered and used by civilians & militaries alike- so I agree, once some innovation is copied the monopoly is over! An AK-47 story is a case in point, and the Russians been complaining about it too! IMO, improving and changing design features isn't copying though- but if taken to court, they can cite their own inventions going back many 100s of years!
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Here's an interesting article I found about the subject matter.

Outside View: China's obsolete fighters

by Ilya Kramnik
Moscow (UPI) May 2, 2008
Earlier this year reports appeared in the media that China had copied Russia's Sukhoi Su-27 Flanker fighter and that its J-11 version, now manufactured in China, would be sold to third countries, undermining Russia's positions on the global arms market.

Although China has made some progress in adapting Russian designs and technology, it is still far from posing either a military or commercial threat to Russian aviation.

The Chinese aircraft industry evolved in the late 1950s with Soviet assistance, and soon mastered production of the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15 Fagot and MiG-17 Fresco fighters, the Ilyushin Il-28 medium-range bomber and other warplanes. Later China got more modern aircraft from the Soviet Union -- the Tu-16, the MiG-21, the Antonov An-12 and others.

By cooperating closely with the Soviet Union, China managed to create a modern air force by the mid-1960s. However, this progress was squandered, and the national aircraft industry began to stagnate, after the beginning of the Cultural Revolution in the late 1960s.

Throughout the 1960s and the 1970s, China failed to develop any new aircraft, instead manufacturing the Q-5 and J-8 -- revamped versions of the MiG-19 Farmer and MiG-21 Fishbed fighters.

Meanwhile, both the Soviet Union and the United States were developing fourth-generation fighters by that time. By the mid-1980s, the Chinese air force was lagging behind Russia and the United States by some 15-20 years.

Beijing mostly sold its obsolete warplanes to the poorest Third World countries, including Albania, Uganda and Bangladesh. China also exported its aircraft to Pakistan, a potential ally against India.

Chinese leaders eventually resolved to rectify the situation by purchasing up-to-date aircraft production technologies. In 1988 China bought production forms and records for Israel's Lavi multi-role fighter. Sixteen years later, in 2004, China mastered production of the Chengdu J-10 -- an essentially Israeli warplane featuring Russian avionics.

Moscow and Beijing mended relations in the late 1980s, leading in 1989 to the signing of several military-technical cooperation agreements that facilitated technology transfers.

Most importantly, Beijing received production forms, records and assembly kits for the Sukhoi Su-27, as well as several Sukhoi Su-30-MKK fighters from Russia. By mastering these advanced warplanes, China obtained superiority over its neighbors and gained an insight into the latest aviation technologies.

Nevertheless, Chinese engineers have so far failed to master production of the Sukhoi Su-27 Flanker's AL-31F power plant. Its Chinese copy, the WS-10A, is less fuel-efficient and has a shorter service life. On the other hand, the J-11B, an upgraded J-11 version, has a pilot-friendly cockpit with color LCD screens.

A new Sukhoi Su-27 radar reportedly developed by China has better specifications than the Soviet-made N-001 radar, but is inferior to Russia's more modern Irbis radar.

To sum up, China has managed to copy an aircraft developed in the early 1980s 15 years after the initial Sukhoi Su-27 deliveries, and 10 years after the first Chinese-assembled Sukhoi Su-27 performed its maiden flight.

But the prototype Sukhoi Su-27 and the J-11 are no match for the revamped Sukhoi Su-27SM fighters now being adopted by the Russian air force and the new Sukhoi Su-35BM, which has entered its testing stage.

Although the J-11 will carve out its own market niche, this does not mean that Russian-made aircraft will lose their popularity. Nor will China pose a greater military threat to Russia. It is evident that neither Moscow nor Beijing wants an open military conflict. Even if such a hypothetic conflict ever flared up, it would be decided by weapons other than advanced fighters.

(Ilya Kramnik is a military commentator for RIA Novosti. This article is reprinted by permission of RIA Novosti. The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.)

(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Outside_View_Chinas_obsolete_fighters_999.html
 

crobato

New Member
WS-10A is spec'ed for a longer service life---at least twice as long---as the Russian equivalent. As a matter of fact, every Russian engine the Chinese reverse engineered, from the WP-6 to the WP-13, had longer service lives than the original. However, the WS-10A might be somewhat a little heavier and a slightly larger diameter than the AL-31F, I suspect.

And its the AL-31F itself never lived up to its life specification. Instead of 1000 flight hours, the engine gets issues around 500 to 750 flight hours.

The KLJ-4 the Chinese developed for the J-11B has nothing to do with the Su-27's N001. It is a descendant and related to the KLJ-1 used on the J-8F, the KLJ-3 and KLJ-10 used on the J-10s, and the KLJ-7 used on the JF-17. It belongs to a family of radars that can be scaled with array, software and component changes. By rationalizing into the same family of fighter radars, the PLAAF fighters can hone commonalities into the maintenance, logistics, crew and pilot training.

The KLJ-4 is a mechanical slotted planar array radar, which by principle is simpler, lighter, mechanically more robust, has greater mechanical flexibility for better FOV, faster scanning rates, and a much better signal gain than the Twist Cassegrain design used by the N001. That alone makes the radar superior to the Su-27SM's N001V. Its not better than the Irbis, however the Irbis is not in service yet, and slotted array planars still get better FOV, lower power consumption, gets less sidelobs, and do pulse compression than PESA's.
 
Top